#and then comparing that to another character who - even through one line - does understand that! it makes me lose it

[bohoteacher]

Navigating Betrayal: Reconciling Admiration with Disillusionment

Like many Neil Gaiman fans this month, I've been shocked and distressed by the news regarding the SA allegations. I won't go over the details, as they're readily available online. I'll start by saying that I believe the accusers, and even the most lenient interpretation of events is still troubling enough to discredit Gaiman. For a long time, I didn't know what to say. I was just shocked and, somewhat naively, felt betrayed. I don't typically idolize actors, authors, or other public figures—I'm here for the characters, they're who I love and believe in. So, how did I end up believing in this man and his rhetoric?

I only had a parasocial relationship with him, which is to say no real relationship at all. But I took his Masterclass on writing, spent hours taking notes, and learned from him. I feel betrayed by someone I saw as a beloved teacher. I know this is insignificant compared to what the women who came forward experienced, but it's a valid feeling, and I needed time to process it. My initial reaction was to throw out and discount everything he’s ever written or done—of course it was.

This isn't just about my love for Good Omens, although how can it not be? I learned so much from this man—about writing, about not being too hard on myself, about the creative process. I read his books to my middle school classes, and we all learned how to be better people from them. Today, I saw and bought Instructions, a children’s book by Neil Gaiman illustrated by Charles Vess, from the used bookstore where I volunteer. It was a used copy, so no royalties will go to him. It’s a beautifully illustrated book where the main character walks through a land that clearly symbolizes life, learning lessons like saying please and "if any creature cries to you that it hurts, if you can, ease its pain." How could someone write this and then do what he did? I asked myself. "What an evil hypocrite," was my first thought. But then I recalled a line from another author, Stephen King. In The Stand, a character is described as "awake at the lectern, but asleep at the switch," meaning they know the right thing to do and can talk about it, but in the moment of choice, they act without integrity.

I don’t know if I’m making sense, but I think it’s too easy to label Gaiman as simply evil, as if he intentionally manipulated us by saying the right things just to make us read or watch his creations. The reality is likely far more complicated. Within this man is the amazing, thought-provoking, life-affirming wisdom that many of us have tried to live by, but also the hard, thoughtless, selfish cruelty that led him to abuse young, vulnerable women. The wisdom does not justify the abuse, and the abuse does not nullify the wisdom.

I think it's too simplistic to say Gaiman is despicable and always has been, hiding it from us all along. This doesn't acknowledge the complexity of human nature—that there is potential for both good and bad within us all. As it’s said, possibly by Terry Pratchett or possibly by Neil Gaiman, “It may help to understand human affairs to be clear that most of the great triumphs and tragedies of history are caused, not by people being fundamentally good or fundamentally bad, but by people being fundamentally people.”

Gaiman is a man who has done some fundamentally good things and some fundamentally bad things. I can’t forget either one.

This is just my opinion. I know some people want to cancel him, while others want to exonerate him. You do you. As for me, I will continue to love Aziraphale and Crowley. I will continue to read and create fan-fiction. I will continue to find comfort and wisdom in books that have meant so much to me over the years. But I will also remember that they were created by a very flawed man whom I can no longer trust.

I understand that opinions on this matter vary widely. I know some people might feel that not discarding everything associated with him is wrong, but this is where I stand. I’m not looking to debate this or be told how I should react. I just needed to process my thoughts in writing and move forward in the way that feels right for me.

[itsclydebitches]

Zevlor: An Angsty Character Analysis

Hey, Zevlor simps. Can I interest anyone in 4,000 words about our favorite disaster tiefling? 💀

“We can’t stay, but we’ll be slaughtered if we leave—we’re no fighters.”

Back during my first play-through this is the line that turned Zevlor from another dime-a-dozen, exposition spouting NPC to a character I was legitimately interested in. “We’re no fighters.” My DnD ignorance abounds, but even I could see that wasn’t an accurate statement. Here’s a mountain of a man sporting fancier armor than my level 2 Tav knows exists yet, having wrecked half the goblin hoard with his crossbow and, if you let him, he'll happily turn to punching as a solution to verbal disagreements. Plus, he’s clearly the one giving the orders, so what do you mean you’re not a fighter?

Having explored the Grove a bit I chalked it up to a generalized assessment of the refugees as a whole. They’re mostly kids, civilians, and would-be protectors who only look the part of fighters in cobbled-together armor. One woman is grappling with the guilt of killing someone for the first time, even an enemy. Lakrissa is sure they’re all going to get slaughtered and is willing to put money on that fact. Meanwhile, the couple you meet are more concerned with what pet they’ll get when they somehow, someway, make it to the city. Don't worry about how that'll happen. You learn later that even those like Ronan are small potatoes compared to most of the baddies you’ll face. On paper he looks and sounds like the real deal—dressed in robes, talking up an apprenticeship with the famous Lorroakan—but scenes like the celebration light show and his own fury at needing to be saved, again, highlight how far he still has to go. The point is that Zevlor is right: these aren’t fighters and he at 18 strength, paladin, former commander, is definitely the exception.

However, BG3 is the sort of detail-heavy game where I’d expect them to include that exception in the dialogue. “We can’t stay, but we’ll be slaughtered if we leave—these people aren’t fighters.” Zevlor’s inclusion of himself in this assessment continued to nag at me and it didn’t start to make sense until I delved into his tag here on tumblr, with more patient players than myself posting everything there is to know about the tiefling. (Thanks, all.) Zevlor is fascinating to me in part because he has this contradictory nature, one example of which is that he’s a very talented fighter who desperately doesn’t want to be a fighter anymore.

…but also he totally does.

We overhear in his dialogue to Tilses that Zevlor is adamant about shedding the titles he’s earned through combat: Hellrider, Commander, Sir. He insists that they’re just civilians now and it’s not like he’s being disingenuous here—note that he introduces himself as just “Zevlor” to Tav. Zevlor means what he says to Tilses and we can see that he’s trying to both reinforce his point and lesson the blow by referring to her as “Tilly.” The nickname is a sweet one, hinting at their close bond in just a single word, reminding her that he’s not saying this to hurt her, he cares for her… but the nickname is simultaneously something he never would have used as her commander. The intimacy meant to comfort is also a hard blow to weather. They're now people who use nicknames inappropriate for the hierarchy of battle.

So Zevlor means what he says here, means it enough that Tilses is convinced and drops her use of “Commander,” but there’s definitely a hint of bitterness in his voice. At least, I’ve always heard it. Zevlor is steadfast in his conviction here, even going so far as to say, “I’m done soldiering, Tilly” when discussing what will come next at Baldur’s Gate. Yet for all of that his tone conveys (understandable) anger and disappointment that it’s come to this. Zevlor doesn’t act like someone who truly wants this change, but rather someone who’s been forced to accept it.

Is it outside forces unwillingly influencing him then? Did Avernus truly change things irrevocably? No, not really. At least, not in the way Zevlor likes to claim. Tilses herself states that being a Hellrider is for life; nothing can take away that title. You lost your post? Your whole city? Most of the people under your protection? Doesn’t matter! You’re a Hellrider forever, no matter the circumstances. I can easily picture a time in Zevlor's life where he would have agreed with Tilses wholeheartedly. They are Hellriders, dammit, and so long as there’s one person looking for their help they will wield that title alongside their blades. And right now, Zevlor has a lot more than just one person in need of his assistance.

So it’s not that Avernus truly stripped them of that identity. Nothing can do that. Zevlor is not rejecting titles and planning retirement because the mechanisms of fate are forcing him to.

He’s doing all that because he’s lost confidence in himself.

Even as someone with a shaky understanding of DnD classes, I love the parallel between a broken oath and the rejection of a lifelong title. If Zevlor can fail in his oath—or in his faith entirely, according to the memories stemming from his pod—why-ever would he think that any other ‘permanent’ part of his identity was worth fighting for? If you can loose the very thing you’ve built your entire life around, every important aspect of yourself, tied to your very soul… what’s a bestowed title compared to that? Zevlor doesn’t believe himself worthy of being a Hellrider anymore, but I think that goes deeper than a string of horrific circumstances making him feel incompetent. As an Oathbreaker, Zevlor likely believes that if he couldn’t uphold that, he can’t uphold anything. Calling himself a Hellrider would be a lie. A fiction. A pathetic, dangerous, insulting fiction at that. It’s like calling yourself the “Hero” while continually failing those around you. Sure, others might insist it’s a title you’ve earned, one you will always carry with you, but you don’t believe them anymore and at a certain point calling yourself that feels worse than embracing the title of “Villain." You don’t want to be the villain… but you want to pretend you’re the hero even less. Pretending is exhausting.

We see this struggle in the many ways that Zevlor fails, or almost fails, to uphold the ideals that originally guided him. I use the term “villain” above deliberately because Zevlor is not merely a former hero-type who’s self confidence has been shattered, or who has been reduced to a civilian, or who thinks themselves useless; he’s actively fighting against temptations that, under less stressful situations, he’d never even consider. I don’t think he is a villain, I think he’s a flawed, struggling victim who sees his own, inevitable mistakes as villainous—and the longer that warped perspective continues the easier it is to fall into bad behaviors. This cycle is perfectly summarized in the autobiography Zevlor keeps by his bed:

“When every passer-by thinks you a thief and a heretic, it is deeply tempting to become one.”

We don’t know if this is Zevlor’s autobiography (as far as I’m aware, anyway) but even if it’s not the words have clearly resonated enough for him to keep them nearby. This particular line paints a pretty clear picture of Zevlor’s struggle. If everyone you meet says you’re devil-kin, vermin, or would-be criminal, isn’t it easier to just give them what they want? If you can’t persuade them otherwise, why put in the effort of trying? If he can’t be Faithful to his God, why have faith in anything at all? If he can’t save these people—setback after setback, mistake after mistake—why is he even making the effort?

Zevlor obviously is trying, very, very hard, which is why such thoughts are merely temptations rather than actual, questionable actions. Still, the Grove gives us numerous examples of the precipice he’s balanced on—and the ways Tav can tip him in one direction or another. You can talk Zevlor down from his anger and get him to acknowledge his disgust in nearly sinking to Aradin’s level. You can also let him boil over and punch the human at a time when the last thing anyone needs is more violence. You can convince Zevlor that there are peaceful ways of stopping Kagha's ritual, or you can help him in pursuing the darker temptation to kill her. It’s a “low” thought, but at his own admission he hasn’t been above entertaining it. Zevlor’s requests for help, though always polite and humble, carry a spark of manipulation in them too. He’s not above leveraging your previously selfless good deed to his advantage—"She owes you for saving this grove"—and if you approach him before speaking with Kagha he’ll claim that the ritual will “be trouble—for all of us.” Except, no? Not really? Tav can make it clear that they’re just here for a healer, they’re only passing through, and as a fighter they are not beholden to the Grove’s sanctuary as the teiflings are. It’s not trouble for everyone involved, yet Zevlor frames it as such in the hopes that (unnecessary) self-interest may motivate you if selflessness fails. Finally, if Zevlor dies in your play-through and you use Speak the Dead on him, he will admit to having “plenty” of secrets, none of which he’ll share. Admittedly, this may be the result of cut content, specifically a story-line in which Zevlor knowingly betrays the tieflings rather than being tricked by the Absolute. Still, the game as it stands is the story we have and within it we’re given a man who is both fighting against these dark urges (ha) and has a past riddled with secrets. If Zevlor is anything, it’s blunt when it comes to his own failings, accurate and otherwise. So how terrible must these secrets be that he outright refuses to divulge them when, generally speaking, most corpses speak freely in death?

However, out of all of this the struggle I’m most intrigued by is the one surrounding the gate. Zevlor represents the tieflings: persecuted refugees, vulnerable civilians, people seeking to survive through cooperation, specifically by joining a community. Kagha represents the druids (or at least a vocal subset of them in Halsin’s absence): bigoted individuals, powerful fighters, people seeking to survive by giving in to their fears, specifically by keeping themselves isolated. This is the moral dichotomy of the Grove and it is symbolized through the gate. Zevlor wants to open it to everyone whereas Kagha wants to close it, permanently.

So isn’t it odd that Zevlor is the one ordering it shut?

When the scene first starts Kanon shouts down that no, he won’t open the gate. Zevlor said that no one is allowed in. Notably, he’s saying this to Aradin and his crew, people that the Grove is at least passingly familiar with, given that Halsin left with them to search the temple. It’s also notable that Zevlor isn’t expecting goblins to attack the Grove. He’s shocked that this is suddenly a problem, brought about by Aradin’s decision—“You lead them here?”— and the entire point of staying at the Grove is that it’s at least comparatively safe. Yes, there have been more attacks lately, but Zevlor seems to be relying on the Grove’s relatively unknown location, as well as the fact that goblins are normally disorganized. The safety is only compromised because Aradin brought a hunting party back, so Zevlor has no reason to expect any visitors, let alone ones that would be a threat.

More importantly, he should welcome such visitors even if he did expect them. After all, that’s precisely what the tieflings are: strangers with no ulterior motives other than to survive. Broadly speaking it makes perfect sense why he'd shut the gates. Zevlor’s first priority is to his people, so anything that keeps them safe is, theoretically, a good thing. But through the lens of his specific characterization and this specific, moral dilemma, it’s an awfully hypocritical decision. Based on everything we’ve seen, our party would not have been welcomed by Zevlor if we’d arrived without danger on our heels and a rescue to endear him to us. So his people should be welcomed, trusted, kept safe, given the benefit of the doubt… but Zevlor isn’t necessarily willing to extend that same trust to others. At the end of the day, he and Kagha want a version of the same thing: safety for those they deem are worthy of it.

It’s precisely these flaws and temptations that make Zevlor such a great character to me, even before he’s tricked by the Absolute. The fandom has leaned hard into Zevlor’s self-loathing and let me tell you, I love it (kisses, hugs, and cookies for you all), but canonically I think he has more reason to fear himself than we tend to portray in the H/C fics. I’m not saying he’s a bad person. Rather, it’s precisely because Zevlor is such a good person that he has the capacity to fall so far. It’s his all-consuming desire to protect his family that leads Zevlor to do and consider so much that a paladin would normally balk at. Denying others the safety you’ve been granted. Subtly manipulating others to do your dirty work. Considering murder.

Zevlor is someone torn between doing the Right Thing and the thing he believes will help those under his care survive. Importantly, when we first meet him he considers these to be two separate courses of action. So can you imagine what goes through his head when he first sees Tav saving everyone and doing so righteously? I think it’s integral to Zevlor’s characterization that the game all but forces you to play the Good Guy in that initial encounter. A cut scene starts, you’re thrown into combat immediately afterwards, and unless you plan to start attacking the Grove members alongside the goblins (which the mechanics discourage through the coloring that distinguishes enemies from allies) you will always finish this fight as Zevlor’s hero. Sure, you can be an asshole afterwards and demand payment. You could already be plotting your betrayal and the slaughter of all the refugees. But in this moment you are nothing but a miracle made flesh in his eyes. Right from the start Tav is succeeding in all the ways Zevlor feels like he's failed. You're the hero.

More specifically, you’re an Every-Man Hero. We might have epic backstories for our Tavs, but within confines of the game you’re largely a nobody when not playing an Origin character. How powerful must that have been to witness then? A total stranger, someone who has no ties to the tieflings or even, depending on your class, any sworn reason to help others, putting their life on the line to save what is most precious to Zevlor? I think a lot about the fact that he never asks Wyll to step in and try to change Kagha’s mind. She owes him just as much as she does Tav—Wyll is an equal participant in that fight and, if your shoddy play style is anything like mine, he likely did more damage—and Wyll is clearly invested in the tiefling’s survival, training the kids as he is. Now, obviously Zevlor’s reticence is largely a question of assigned roles (we need to be the one engaging with Kagha because we’re the protagonist/player) but, like Zevlor’s choice to include himself in the Not a Fighter group, it would have been all too easy to explain this away within the narrative. One comment about how Wyll already tried and failed, or how Kagha doesn’t trust Warlocks, or hell, maybe you don’t meet Wyll in the Grove at all. It’s an easy thing to accomplish and though this is edging more into the realm of headcanon than anything else, I can’t help but think that Wyll isn’t the kind of person that Zevlor could turn to for help right now. Because he’s a folk hero. The Blade of Frontiers, known far and wide for his impressive, selfless deeds. Zevlor is struggling so hard to keep the tieflings safe, tempted by all the unsavory solutions that might achieve that, drowning in self-hatred as his past and current failings catch up with him, wanting nothing more than to be his peoples’ protector:

“I would be a paladin again—with a god’s purpose, a god’s power. Everything I needed to protect my people. And all the while, the cult tortured them. They fought, and ran, and died around me, while I imagined myself their savior.”

Three of the things Zevlor mutters while trapped in the pod are “Hellrider… for… life…,” “Trust… in me…,” and “Children… look away… look at me…” He wants to be the protector, the one children look to for reassurance, he wants his words to Tilly to be a lie and he wants a way to prove that he is a Hellrider for life… but he’s not. At least, Zevlor doesn’t believe it. He lost his titles while Wyll still proudly bears his. Wyll trains the children to fight while Zevlor can only get swept up in anger at them being threatened. The people trust Wyll, adore him, he’s the hero and Zevlor… is not. Not anymore.

It’s too painful to approach Wyll and admit all that. That would be a hell of a blow to Zevlor's pride. But Tav? A stranger? A nobody? The Every-man who had no reason to help or reputation pressuring them, saving them anyway? That’s inspiring. Someone like Tav could be the answer and even, perhaps, the proof that Zevlor could redeem himself. Neither of them are folk heroes, untouchable in their assumed perfection. Tav is a living, breathing example of how the flawed, everyday adventurer can be everything Zevlor strives for.

No wonder he won’t shut up about them in the Shadowlands.

All of this is why it’s so tragic that Zevlor wasn’t given a redemption arc. Sure, you can recruit him for the final battle against the Netherbrain, but there’s no quest to change the cast’s opinion of him—or change Zevlor’s opinion of himself. All his content at the end of Act 2 and Act 3 reinforces that self-hatred.

Let’s make a list, shall we?

Nearly every line of his reunion with Tav has Zevlor painting himself in the worst light possible, from “a lie kinder than the truth” to his refusal to join you because he believes he’ll stab you in the back. You cannot convince him of the Absolute’s manipulation and there’s no response to his belief that such horrors start within the person like, “Of course it does! Because we’re all flawed and equally capable of good and evil deeds! That potential doesn’t make you irredeemable, Zevlor, it makes you mortal!!”

He’s utterly failed as his peoples’ champion and he’s also deemed “unworthy” of being a True Soul. Obviously not being chosen by the Absolute is a good thing, but for a man drowning in self-loathing that’s one hell of a complicated rejection.

Nearly all the tieflings hate him now, all those people he’s been sacrificing his soul to keep safe. I found it particularly devastating that this is one of the rare occasions where nailing a persuasion check doesn’t change the person’s mind. There’s at least one tiefling at Moonrise (I’m drawing a blank on her name) who will believe you when you explain how the Absolute influenced Zevlor, but that doesn’t lead to forgiveness.

Zevlor is deemed unimportant on a literal, narrative level. He is very easy to miss in the pods (I nearly did on my first play-through) and the game does incredibly little to dissuade you from that mistake. Putting aside for a moment that obviously an Origin companion is more significant than a minor NPC, compare this to Shadowheart screaming from her own pod, the game making it abundantly clear that this is someone in need of help—someone worth rescuing. She’ll even say later that you could have run past, more concerned with your own survival and the big picture heroics to bother with her. How must it feel then, if Zevlor ever learns that Tav was there and never stopped for him?

If you do miss Zevlor… oh boy. We’ve probably all seen at least a recording of Orin’s so-called gift. There are plenty of characters who can meet untimely and devastating ends, but very few go through this level of horror. Zevlor—after being held captive, remember—is tortured by God’s Favorite Torturer. He is stripped of his personhood and reduced to a mere “message,” a “pet.” Zevlor is further humiliated in death by being literally stripped of his armor—not just vulnerable in his nakedness, but denied the last symbol of his faith, his status, his power—and it’s always struck me that this is the closest we see to him 'enjoying' an intimate moment, this parody in Orin’s painting. Zevlor is one of the NPC’s most in need of physical comfort and instead he’s forced into this torturous mockery of a sex scene. It also hits hard that when Tav first spots his body the narration says that Zevlor “might almost be sleeping.” Undoubtedly this is a man who isn’t taking good care of himself. He needs a good night’s rest, yet this horrifying trick is all he gets.

As if all this weren’t enough, most of your companion are VERY critical of Zevlor while commenting on his demise. It’s one thing for the tieflings to believe the worst given their ignorance and the fact that they are the ones who suffered from Zevlor’s failure, but your company understands the Absolute and the ways that she gets her hooks in people. Still, Astarion calls him a “wet rag” even if he did deserve better than this. Shadowheart wouldn’t have wished this on him either, but she can’t help but slip in a “no matter his failings.” Lae’zel, often the most blunt, straight up says that he was “always destined to fail his people—and to fail us.” Wyll shakes his head and intones that “even good intentions can lead us down deadly paths.” Only Gale and Karlach stick to mourning the dead rather than airing his shortcomings.

When I spoke to my allies before the final battle Zevlor didn’t have a cut scene. It became clear to me later that this must have been a bug in my play-through, but at the time it only reinforced my feelings that his story was incomplete. Looking on Youtube I’ve found recordings of him saying that he is a Hellrider once more and he would “die a proud man if [he] were to die this day”… but that rings as terribly hollow given where we left him. Last we were together, Zevlor was saying in no uncertain terms that he could not be trusted, he would fail again, he was unworthy of forgiveness. Where did this change of heart come from? It makes perfect sense that he would help Tav in this moment—he begs to be of some use after getting free—but not that he would present himself with such confidence. Within the story as it’s been told this feels… fake. Like Zevlor is putting on a mask to fit the mood of this lively, optimistic party. Which, in turn, gives the “I would die a proud man” line a terrifying implication to me. Does Zevlor expect to die this day? Does he intend to? What would persuade him not to lay down his life here and now? His mission is complete. The tieflings are safe—though not by his hand. There's no hero's welcome waiting for him after this battle. They hate him. He hates himself, and by his own admission the one thing that could still make him proud would be to die at Tav’s side, trying to do one last bit of good. If someone said that to me after everything Zevlor has been through I would keep them far away from the front lines.

(I did, for the record lol.)

I’m not saying anything new then when I go, “Larian, PLEASE add more to his story.” Give us a Zevlor side-quest to renew his oath. Let us invite him to our camp. Something to link the broken man mid-game and the confident fighter at the end so that the latter doesn’t feel like an alarm bell with two legs and a tail. I mean yeah, I get hooked on minor characters so 75% of this is simply me wanting more content of a fave, but I also I do legitimately believe that BG3’s story would benefit from tying up loose ends like this.

Zevlor is a fantastic character, someone who contains an astounding amount of complexity for so little screen time. You have to follow up on that complexity though. If he’s meant to be a purely tragic figure, okay, fine, that’s the ending you get with Orin. But one where he joins you with a smile and reclaims a title he's previously rejected with such fervor requires more work in the middle; a through-line that explains how someone with so much self-loathing learns to think of himself as the hero again.

Because it does all come down to Zevlor’s perception of himself. He was always a hero, flaws and all. He always was and always will be a Hellrider.

The UI knows what's up :)

[aromantic-diaries]

Yknow I feel more represented by characters who aren't confirmed to be aro/ace or even written as such, but can still be interpreted that way because of how they're characterized, rather than characters who are confirmed to be aro/ace through word of god while the actual story has no implications of that character being aro/ace beyond them not having a love interest. The latter kind of waters it down to not wanting to date or have sex which isn't really all there is to it. I get that not all representation has to be a 100% accurate, deep and touching depiction of the aro/ace experience, but that doesn't mean completely ignoring the character's identity beyond not giving them a love interest.

I will elaborate with two examples under the cut

So for the word of god representation, let's take Lilith Clawthorne from the owl house as an example. I think she's a great character, I liked her, and I think the owl house is a fantastic show that deserved better. However I don't think of Lilith as good representation because the only real confirmation we have is outside of the actual show. It's not in the canon material, she doesn't have a love interest but she's not even the only character who stays single so that doesn't mean much. She isn't shown to be any different from anyone, her being aroace isn't really relevant in any way. I'd say the best word for describing this type of representation is Passive. We know she's aroace because it was confirmed outside of the show, she doesn't have a love interest, but it doesn't really go beyond that. I get that the show was cut short and maybe it would have been elaborated on more but that's just a generous assumption on my part. My point is, I don't really see any real aro or ace experiences reflected in her character, neither mine or anyone else's. She doesn't really represent any actual aspec experiences at all which is why I don't consider her to be good representation. I still understand the community's attachment to her though, we take what we can get and what we get is very little. So while I love the owl house, the aroace representation is pretty dissapointing compared to the great representation of other queer identities and I'm kinda bummed that the aroace character still gets sidelined in an otherwise very queer friendly show

For another example I'll bring up my all time favorite, Rudy Waltz, protagonist of the book Deadeye Dick by Kurt Vonnegut. Deadeye Dick is not a feel good story. The story is dark, bitter and the conclusion is no different. Still, I would describe it as oddly comforting and pretty funny at times. So what does that have to do with anything? Well, our Rudy can very well be interpreted as asexual and probably aromantic as well. He isn't referred to as such, he describes himself as a neuter, the author states in the preface that the protagonist's disinterest is a metaphor for his own declining sexuality, and the book was written before the term aromantic was even coined. However, as an aromantic asexual reading the book, I could not help but deeply relate to Rudy's lack of interest in ever having sex or finding a romantic partner. I felt kinship with him as he described knowing how many people there are who are just like him and yet they go unnoticed by most people, because I was one of those people. I related to him and the way his disinterest in sex was met with such confusion from another character. Despite not being described as such, Deadeye Dick is very much in part an asexual and an aromantic story because the protagonist's experiences line up with that of someone on those spectrums. You could argue that calling him aroace is problematic due to him fitting a negative stereotype due to his emotional detachment, or that he only fits the label because of said detachment, but that does not change the fact that he is still better representation than a character who was confirmed outside of the story with no real implications. I see myself in Rudy more than I do in Lilith because Rudy actually feels like an aroace character

Anyways, rant over. Feel free to disagree with me

[dalekofchaos]

Friendly reminder. Bruce Wayne hung up the suit and retired after THREATENING someone with a gun and this was his reaction.

And then his immediate reaction is to shut down and close the Batcave and his only words were. "Never again"

A truly tragic, but fitting way for Bruce’s career to end. Powerful stuff. Batman's career ended the same way it began: with a desperate man wielding a gun

Batman choosing not to be weak like Joe Chill >>>> Batman going on a killing spree because fighting crime is hard.

And by the way, since Zack Snyder says his inspiration was Dark Knight Returns, I got news for you, TDKR Batman doesn't kill either.

Zack Snyder is a complete blithering fucking idiot.

his statement on Batman just lines up with what I’ve seen from all of his work. He likes the idea of the comics he makes movies out of but he doesn’t actually understand their themes. A Batman that kills is pointless. An edgy Superman is not only the most boring way to write him, but doesn’t make any sense without the wholesome one. That’s why injustice Superman/brightburn/Plutonian/omniman/homelander kind of make sense in their own ways because the original exists to compare them to.(mostly also boring though) His take on watchmen was pretty much devoid of any of the actual commentary from the graphic novel, but instead was just a dark justice league that were pretty bad at their jobs. Rorschach was just framed as a kind of unhinged Batman, but still a badass that does good, which is wildly generous compared to the way he’s originally written. I can understand turning your brain off and coasting through an action movie, but his fans are delusional if they think he does any of these stories justice. I wouldn’t take any of his comments seriously if they would stop letting him make these mediocre movies.

Zack Snyder is all flash and no substance. His films are visually stunning but utterly lacking in compelling storytelling.

The point of Batman is he cannot 'stoop to their level'. He HAS to be better, he HAS to believe these criminals can be rehabilitated, because if he kills them, he becomes just like them. With his wit, his intellect, he could future proof the city against crime ever happening by just killing the criminals before they commit crimes based on probable statistics and similar themes. But a Batman who refuses to kill is a murderer by inaction. Every time he chooses not to put Joker in the ground, he's allowed him to slaughter dozens, hundreds more, just for a laugh. Batman is equally guilty for every one of those deaths, because he could simply kill the Joker, and stop him from ever killing again. But he doesn't. Snyder saying Batman can kill, Batman SHOULD kill, is to say that without batman doing so, or being able to, he is just as bad as the villians. Except dipshit doesn't even have his Batman kill The Joker. "Oopsie daisy, Joker got out and bombed a hospital full of people, sowwwwyyyy, I put him back in jail again dunt worry TeeHeee :3". And then next week we do it all over again. OR. You kill the Joker, and he never hurts another person again. Which is why Jason Todd works so well as a counter to batman, and SHOULD be what Snyder is looking into. The reason why Zod works so well as a villain is because Humans are flawed apes who cant be trusted to govern themselves and should be conquered, and Superman, a literal God, could fix all that, but doesn't, because of Hope. Its foolish, childish even, to consider that a solution. And when placed in the vacuum of a comic book it works because you have to suspend disbelief, and forget that Superman let a city full of people die while he punched Zod through skyscrapers.

If you want Batman to kill people, just go and read one of his 1784956th copies that kill people. Go read Midnighter. Go read Punisher. Go read Moon Knight. Go read Peacemaker. Go read Nighthawk. What is stopping you?

I'm sure all those characters have brought about the peace and prosperity and the crime-free society that a "killer Batman" was supposed to. "Punisher would clean Gotham in under a week", right, just like he cleaned Marvel's New York, didn't he?

It has to be Batman specifically the one doing the killing? The number of superheroes that kill is nowadays much higher than the number of heroes who don't. Remember how Hawkeye spent the better part of his existence being the most anti-killing Avenger? Nowadays he is known as a super-assassin that "never had a non-kill rule". Should heroes who don't kill go extinct?

I like that Batman doesn't kill people. I feel no need to turn him into something he isn't like it was done to Hawkeye. If I wanted a Batman that kills, I would go and read one of the thousand "Batman who kills" out there.

Batman should not kill and should never kill.

"Gotham would be better off if Batman just killed The Joker"

You. Miss. The. Entire. Point.

Bruce Wayne lost his parents to crime and Bruce Wayne is a child who died alongside his parents and was reborn as a creature dedicated to insuring it never happened to any other child. He made a vow never to reduce himself to the criminal scum’s level or to Joe Chill’s level. He never kills for a reason.

Batman not killing is what makes him so compelling, if he kills criminals, there is no moral conflict, he is no better than the Punisher, Wolverine or any other dark edgy hero. Hell, if he starts to take a life, Batman is no better than Ra’s Al Ghul.

In the Daredevil Netflix show, Frank Castle told Daredevil this “That’s not how this works. You cross over to my side of the line, you don’t get to come back from that. Not ever.” That alone is why Batman should not kill, not even The Joker. Bruce Wayne is not Frank Castle, stop trying to make him Frank Castle. I mean…Stan Lee was absolutely disgusted when someone called The Punisher a hero, Frank Castle is a murderer, not a hero. How is this so hard for people to understand?

I don’t want to hear that Batman killed in the old comics and I don’t want to hear Elseworld stories. It’s an established fact that Batman does not kill and it’s a big part of his character.

Guess what? We already got a Bruce who killed The Joker, it happened in the Burtonverse/Schumacherverse and he was disgusted with himself. “So, you're willing to take a life.” “Long as it's Two-Face.” “Then it will happen this way: You make the kill, but your pain doesn't die with Harvey, it grows. So you run out into the night to find another face, and another, and another, until one terrible morning you wake up and realize that revenge has become your whole life. And you won't know why.”

A huge part of Bruce’s character is that he doesn’t kill, no matter what. Same with Clark. But edgelord writers from the New 52, DCEU and the Injustice abominations think it’s cool to make heroes kill. Heroes should not kill. You can’t be a hero and a killer. IT DOESN’T WORK THAT WAY!

Guess what would happen if Batman kills The Joker? The Joker wins. The Joker and Batman are each trying to prove a point to society - and really to us, the readers. The Joker wants Batman to kill him because he perfectly embodies chaos and anarchy and wants to prove a point to everyone that people are basically more chaotic than orderly. This is why he is so scary: we are worried he may be right. If the Joker is right, then civilization is a ruse and we are all truly monsters inside. If the Joker can prove that Batman - the most orderly and logical and self-controlled of all of us - is a monster inside, then we are all monsters inside, and that is terrifying. The Joker is terrifying because we fear that we are like him deep down - that he is us. Batman is what we (any average person) could be at our absolute best, and the Joker is what we could be at our absolute worst. The Joker’s claim is that we are all terrible deep down, and it is only the law and our misplaced sense of justice that keeps us in line. Since Batman isn’t confined by the law, he is a perfect test case to try to get him to "break.” The Joker wants Batman to kill a person, any person, but knows that the only person Batman might ever even remotely consider killing would have to be a terrible monster, so is willing to do this himself and sacrifice himself to prove this macabre point. Batman needs to prove that it is not just laws that keep us in line, but basic human decency and our natural instinct NOT to kill. If Batman can prove this, then others will be inspired by his example (the citizens of Gotham, but again, also the readers), just as we are all inspired every day to keep civilization running smoothly and not descend into violence, anarchy, and chaos. This ability to be decent in the face of the horrors and temptations present all around us is humanity’s superpower, the superpower of each of us. The struggle of Batman and the Joker is the internal struggle of each of us. But we are inspired by Batman’s example, not the Joker’s, because Batman always wins the argument, because he has not killed the Joker.

Batman not killing matters. Batman stories to me are the ultimate tale of turning pain and suffering into something positive. That is a story that everyone can relate to because let's be honest here. The world can suck. I've experienced and probably will always experience feelings of fear of depression of anger of angst. It's in my nature as a human being to experience those things. It's in all our nature it is what we choose to do with that pain that we all feel that defines us. Batman chose to turn all those negative emotions, he feels into a symbol that can bring people. Hope that Batman will save us from pain but more importantly hope that we can all be Batman. Why do we fall? And Batman Begins explains this best “Why do we fall sir? So that we can learn to pick ourselves up.”

Yes, Bruce Wayne is a flawed crazy person. He is at times mean stubborn and even abusive but he is still good. He is still someone we can aspire to be. We can try our hardest to be Superman but no human being can fly, but we can still try to be Batman We can all try to turn our pain into something good when I see Batman killing people or fans saying he killed before and he should kill The Joker, It pains me. It actually hurts my soul. Batman is not about finding a way to kill evil. But try to redeem it. His mission is an impossible task. Maybe he should kill people. Maybe he should kill The Joker, but what makes him fascinating what makes him a hero Is the fact that he has that moral code and stopped himself from crossing that line That's why I always looked up to Batman even as a kid despite all the adult subtext or mature themes superheroes are for kids. And killing is not Batman and it is not Bruce Wayne. This is why I hated the portrayal in the DCEU and the Burtonverse and why I really hated the implication that Batman killed The Joker in Batwoman. A Batman who kills is certainly not Bruce Wayne, that is an interpretation of Bruce Wayne that completely misses the point of Batman. It's easy to kill. Batman does not make the easy choice… Batman does not kill.

[dekusleftsock]

Don’t y’all love it when a popular tiktok creator is analyzing a character and interpreting it so, so wrong, and him and his dumb ass take is spreading.

Like it was one thing for you to be wrong

ITS ANOTHER THING FOR YOU TO BE WRONG AND MAKING OTHER PEOPLE MORE WRONG

If one more person says that Izuku is “underdeveloped” and that he’s “uninterested in all of his other relationships” and that he “has a power imbalance in his relationships with other characters bc they care more about him than he does them” STOP. PLEASE STOP.

A fundamental part of Izuku’s character: He is an UNRELIABLE NARRATOR. Most of his character is, therefore, told through SUBTEXT.

Izuku doesn’t say that he feels ashamed about his feelings for Katsuki.

But he does say that he thinks they’re gross.

Izuku doesn’t say that he thinks that Toga and her feelings aren’t human

But he does say that she is the “perfect counter to this quirk”.

THE LIST COULD GO ON.

Izuku is an unreliable narrator in a third person omniscient story (though sometimes mha acts more like a third person objective story? Anyway). That means that the way we do not understand the story is not through a retelling of what is happening to you, the viewer, unreliably—instead it is not telling you the full extent of his character and his thoughts.

To say “izuocha’s relationship is underdeveloped because it’s one sided” is NOT the same as saying “bkdk’s relationship is underdeveloped because it’s one sided”.

Izuku has always been obsessed with Katsuki. At some point the rhetoric being passed around was that it was Katsuki who was underdeveloped and uninterested in the dynamic. Now that rhetoric has been reversed since we’ve seen so much of Katsuki’s POV.

Ochako has always been obsessed with Izuku, NEVER THE OTHER WAY AROUND. In fact, Ochako’s arc even surrounded letting go of those feelings… as literally said in the text. Because that is a textual statement that she makes.

Izuku does not understand how or what Ochako loves in anybody, especially him. She loves a unique sense of personhood, which Izuku has always carried, and of which she saw in the entrance exam.

Izuku does not know how to view things he deems as “girly”, and Ochako very personally CANT be in a relationship with someone that she has realized is very repressed. Her friendships turn from friends to fascination very quickly, into her heroic form. (Think her few moments with Katsuki in that extra, or how disinterested she became of Izuku as she saw him run away from help, and not know how to respond to an apology. Or, hell, how much more interested she became when Himiko was honest with her feelings in their second real confrontation. She even says that she “admires how she can love so freely, and say it with her whole chest”)

LIKE ALL OF THESE THINGS. THIS IS WHY IZUOCHA ISNT DEVELOPED. That’s a purposeful choice in genius writing, at least in my opinion.

Bkdk is a result of Izuku being uninterested in acknowledging said feelings, and this is shown to be different because of the amount of times he has had that imply a deeper emotion or thought that we are not told. Think black whip, controlling your heart solely surrounding katsuki, “my feelings are gross”, the ear piercing scream when katsuki was kidnapped and the “this was a total loss” line, relaxing into katsuki’s arms after the apology, only coming home because of Katsuki, comparing romantic feelings toga had for him and admiration to ALLMIGHT and not katsuki who was “actually in his life”, I COULD GO ON FOR HOURS.

This is absolutely NOT underdeveloped, this is called SHOW NOT TELL. Horikoshi is so purposeful in what he shows vs what he tells. He tells you that ochako and toga are the same, he tells you that katsuki is worried about Izuku, he tells you that katsuki is there to step in when deku can’t handle it on his own, he tells you that ochako has a crush on Izuku, and he tells you that Katsuki is Izuku’s “closest person”.

But he also SHOWS YOU SO MUCH MORE. Unreliable narration is such a key part of Izuku and his character. Izuku doesn’t understand Izuku as much as the audience doesn’t understand him. It’s why I genuinely think most interpretations of his character are wrong, because you really can’t take him at his word. It’s the same reason no one understood katsuki for the longest time, he was in the same circumstances of a character who is only showed to you, not told.

I know i named so many god damn references so if anyone is curious as to what specifically I’m talking about with what, I’ll gladly show what scene I’m referring to. Apparently I can’t remember a damn thing but this manga anyway.

[showtoonzfan]

Hey it’s been a bit! The Mammon episode finally came out, so here’s my review!

Pros:

- The sign language scene was cute. Kinda weird that a kid was seeing a show that was clearly for adults but I love me some representation so it gets a pass.

- Despite Blitz not really needing to be in this episode, I thank god he had little screen time and more time was dedicated to Fizz.

- The fish ladies (despite having wonky color palettes that made them EXTREMELY hard to look at) were cute.

Cons:

- Mammon is so flat and uninteresting but I don’t know what I expected from a creator who always hypes her characters up that always end up being one of the three go-to personalities she picks for her male characters. In Mammon’s case he’s just a loud mouth cursing bum so way to ruin another Deadly Sin and make them boring af, moving on.

- I don’t like how Mammon and Fizz’s relationship are similar of Val and Angel’s, Viv keeps recycling stories, characters and plot lines ect, it makes Angel’s story for Hazbin really predictable/underwhelming and not exciting to look forward too especially since we already have the “mafia bad daddy” aspect to him too that they pulled for Moxxie. I guess the idea of Mammon being a controlling ruler is fine on paper but not much is done with it, Fizz just quits in the end like it was easy with zero consequences so what was all that build up for.

- Fizz himself once again feels REALLY out of character, he’s just too soft compared to how he was introduced in season 1. He’s constantly nervous in this episode and insecure, as well as walking on eggshells, and even in Oops he wasn’t THIS sensitive. I’m all for characters struggling and being kicked down but it has to make sense and not feel forced, and once again it feels like Viv is trying way to hard to make the characters she once introduced as snarky assholes to uwu innocent babies. I refuse to believe Fizz was actually INTIMIDATED by this random geeky imp who insulted him, as well as the fish ladies whom he was weirdly nice and welcoming to. It’s also weird seeing how uncomfortable/nervous he was around his fans when I thought the whole point was that he LOVED praise and loved being famous, at least that was season 1 Fizz. Now he feels retconned. Seeing him say “I just need this gig” is weird too, the explanation to why he went through all of this makes no sense, Fizz still has Ozzie and is famous in the Lust ring, and I understand Mammon is his idle but to go through all that abuse for so long for something that could have been so easily avoided feels forced to fit the plot, but it also makes Fizz look dumb.

- There’s confusing lore stuff regarding Mammon and Ozzie, and it makes me realize that Viv should have picked ONE storyline aka ONE Seven Deadly sin to go with Fizz’s story because this is getting mixed up. Fizz acts like if he looses this completion, he looses everything, which confused the heck out of me because no he wouldn’t have? First of all, Ozzie is a fucking powerful sin, how would you loose him? Second, from what we know from season 1, Fizz is a jester who performs at Ozzie’s club. It was Ozzie who built the sex robots across the rings of hell, NOT Mammon, and in season 2 we see that Fizz is under Ozzie’s care and lives in his house. Yet for some weird reason Mammon also represents Fizz and uses him for profit, but it’s not really explained in a way that makes sense, like Love’s art had said in her Fizz redesign video, Fizz’s job is really confusing on what exactly he does. Having both Ozzie and Mammon represent him overcomplicates things and the show did a poor job at explaining how this goes.

- Once again Viv dumps trauma and struggle onto her characters without building it up first. When did Fizz ever give off the impression that he was being controlled or abused, or even that he was so insecure and constantly walked on eggshells to be perfect. In Oops he was happy to be in the spotlight and happy to get the attention, he bragged to Blitz about how successful he was. He seemed happy to perform for Mammon and talked of him highly, and now you’re pulling an Angel Dust situation where he’s expected to be perfect 24/7 and it gets to him emotionally, while also being someone who’s physically and mentally abused. Yet another season 2 episode that wasn’t planned, same as how Millie wanting to feel important wasn’t planned, same as how Stolas seeing Blitz as genuine love wasn’t planned. Different episode, same issues.

- I’m so done with the Hell lore bro, this place officially has no rules and demons can just do anything without consequences. There’s no class system, there’s no rankings, there’s no power dynamics, screw anything that Viv says. There was no fucking reason why Ozzie and Fizz’s relationship needed to be a secret. There was no reason showing Ozzie threatening his workers to not tell anyone about his love life if he was just going to admit it to EVERYONE THE NEXT EPISODE IN FRONT OF ANOTHER SIN ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME— what was the POINT. What is the point of Stolas and Blitz’s conflict. What is the point of Stella being classist. What is the point of these class systems and rules if you can just announce that you technically broke a hell rule and no one gives a fuck and you get off scott free. Mammon telling Ozzie “you’ll regret that” like a cartoon villain doesn’t do anything either. What is he ganna do? Tell Lucifer, the character that canonically won’t appear in HB because the sins won’t appear in HH? If Lucifer rules over the sinners, who the fuck is in charge for the rest of Hell. Where’s the authority? And Mammon is just ganna come back for another episode to give the gang trouble cause lord knows we don’t have enough fucking villains already.

- It feels weird that Ozzie would just sit back while someone whom he knows is a piece of shit is treating his loved one badly. I get he was concerned but you’d think one of the seven deadly sins would have more power and authority.

- I was expecting some big gross bug-like thing to appear when Mammon was transforming into his final form, only for it to the exact same design but with small extra eyes and a spider lower half that isn’t even visible in most shots….GOD VIV.

Watching this episode also made me remind myself that this is supposed to be Hell. Seeing Fizz feel better and stand up for himself was sweet but these soft lessons and morals don’t belong in a show like this, and it’s extra aggravating regarding Viv’s double standard, how she can just pick and choose which characters she wants to be evil and which characters are saints. Overall not anywhere near the worst episode of season 2, but I am officially done with Helluva Boss so-

[theoldoor]

Canon height difference vashrir save me canon height difference vashrir + post-talia AAWWWHHHGFDFHO

FUUUCKKK I HATE THE OC X CANON BRAINROT CUZ ITS LOWK EMBARRASSSIIIINNGGG

Ok but im not stingy, fenrir is not only to aventurine hes the ip3 little lapdog guy

With topaz he’s the guy who randomly shows up and became the dad (platonically) to the single mom (topaz) and the kid (numby) loves him like a real dad

With Aventurin- ill shut up (theyre each other everything’s at this point, enemies, allies, comrades, family, etc… and they have went through so much they are trauma bonded together like ionic bonds bro i am so giddied up about them. The love for one another that comes so naturally that they doesnt even realize theyre loving the other person, the subconscious worry and care for the other person despite everything and the CHARACTER X CHARACTER’S FOIL TROPE ALWAYS GETS MY ASSSSS THEY WULD LOVE ANYONE, EVEN THE TOTAL OPPOSITES OF THEM, ALL EXCETO THESEMVESLC. Wanting to know each other unapologetically, willingly and no ulterior motives, knowing for the sake of understanding thelakthe iulkdfhasdf. They have their own toxic traits in their dynamic but thats why they work because you cant use a saint to catch a sinner. Bro attachment dude who is desperate for attention and will do anything to get it x avoidant mfer who wants no one to stick with him because he’s afraid to ruin them bro i can aldsfhasohaDAAAAAA. The bickering tempered cat to soft kitty pipe line the trope of when theyre planning of ways to get rid of the other character while the other character thinks of how their future would be like turning into them living in the same space in a future none of them predicted. The trope of one having light in their eyes x no light in their eyes to gave up the light in their eyes for the others light in their eyes forhaeh. Care him like breathing x thinsk he cant be cared for good fucking lord save me. Notices when he’s not around x wish he was special. When auf wiedersehen sweetheart. When fenrir doesnt want to leave so aventurine has to force him to leave whe- saving someone who doesnt want to be saved when a character turn cruel because theyve lost everything x person who refuse to let them hate them when bickering in the beginning but at the end sacrifice for each other when “i dont care for myself” x “ill do it” when when “i wont wait forever” x “what if i did” when not being the strongest but still desperately tries to save the other person when they take care of the same kid togehter when it started out as one couldnt even care less x another desperate for them to even glance at them turns into two people who can’t bear the thought of another person in harm whehtehwehwehwhwhennn-)

Dr Ratio is funny cuz Fenrir is his wet dog pathetic student who can’t read and write but also got a doctorate in like 2 months and now Fenrir is also teaching with Dr Ratio but he’s teaching linguistic and literature. The strict teacher who is strict bc he cares x the chillax teacher who will get scary if he needs to. FFUUUUUCCCK PROFESSOR X PROFESSOR RIVAL AND THEY COMPARE THEIR STUDENTS GRADES TYPE SHIITTT IIMMM AFDLSFJHKAAAUAUHH.

Also post talia fenrir lol

He got a doctorate pretty fast and was invited to join the Riddlers, he considered it but decided not to because Dr Ratio told him so- but he does work with them in the dark. Fenrir would become a professor and although not invited to the Intelligentsia Guild yet, he’s bickering Dr Ratio to.

Since he’s out of Talia, he often hangs around Aventurine’s office and sometimes tag along back to his apartment too to do all the house chores and make dinner so Aventurine can rest. Housewife basically, malewife…. Fenrir….

[purecommemasolitude]

There’ve been criticisms about Darry being too mean or too cruel in the musical, and I get where those people are coming from, but — and speaking as someone who hasn’t seen or listened to it but has listened to the soundtrack and follows the information account like the paper — I think this phenomenon stems from two things

First, on the side of the discussers, a lack of exposure to the musical as an actual piece of material instead of (occasionally very out of context) lines or screenshots. Obviously seeing the musical, even if one lived in New York, would be expensive as all get out, and even audios and boots are pretty hard to find for this show, but there are many details and contexts that change how lines on the page should be interpreted that simply cannot be gleaned through, well, lines on the page. As someone who has dabbled in acting & directing, and has spent time analyzing play texts in depth, delivery and direction can change everything. The entire sentiment of a line can be the opposite of what you’d expect if you took the line at face value, and unless that’s explicit in the stage directions, it can go unrealized if one is merely reading the script (which, as an aside, is exactly why I find analyzing play excerpts tricky — because without a performance or direction, scripts are often so ambiguous and versatile that they could go any way). And honestly, despite also being someone who unfortunately does not benefit from first hand knowledge of the musical, I feel like this is very evident in discussion of Darry in the show. For example, none of his lines in, say, Runs in the Family (Reprise) should be taken at face value, because if you’ve even listened to the song you can tell he’s completely spiralling and hitting a breaking point. This is a state that, historically, causes people to say things they’d never believe in real life. We’re not meant to believe Darry would ever walk out on his brothers, we’re meant to hear him talk about it and understand how deep of a breakdown he is having. As a less obvious example, from what people online have said, Darry spends the last twenty or so minutes of the musical in tears. Again, the things he says here aren’t necessarily the things he believes, or things that he’s expressing coolly or off-handedly because they line up 1:1 with his worldview, they’re things he says when he’s desperate and struggling and has no idea what the correct path is when his brother & responsibility has effectively been comatose since the deaths

Which brings me to my next point!

One of the most known things about the musical, even to people who aren’t very familiar with it, is that it goes more in-depth on Darry’s trials and tribulations, so to speak. He gets one solo at status quo, another (mostly) solo when he gets his breakdown, and a (mostly) duet in his own self-described darkest hour during Pony’s absence. All three of these songs go into detail about what his life is like and how much he’s been struggling, and even songs that aren’t about him emphasize this feature of his more than in the book: his description by Ponyboy in Tulsa ’67 & Great Expectations reminding the audience of his life’s path, his verse in GGAH making it clear that his life is a very different one with arguably more severe burdens compared to the other boys. Other than the three most important characters of the original narrative, he is now undoubtedly the most important and developed character — which makes sense in a musical format, because with the story of The Outsiders it would’ve been pretty much impossible to do a true ensemble cast other than the main three while doing any of them justice, especially if they’d kept Steve as a principle (rip king). But I digress. In my opinion, being clearer on Darry’s hardships actually gives the musical space to show him as saying crueller things, to have him make more mistakes and mess up worse. In the book, we’re clearly meant to sympathize with him by the end, but we only get Ponyboy’s infamously flawed and unreliable narration as the lense through which to view him. As such, if we went too hard into Darry messing up, while 3/4 of the book have Ponyboy going “yeah Darry’s a rock and doesn’t love me or anyone”, he ultimately would’ve come across a lot worse and a lot harder to “redeem” in the eyes of the reader (personally I never disliked him, but I’ve seen enough accounts of people who hated him on their first go at the story to know it is not an uncommon sentiment). He already slaps his brother and argues with him all the time; it would’ve been even more legwork to make him liked if he’d also been saying harsher things and making more mistakes. In the musical, however, we get that objective perspective that’s missing in the book. Ponyboy’s not narrating to us the lyrics of Throwing in the Towel, he’s not even present for the events of Throwing in the Towel! It’s a lot easier to understand and forgive mistakes if one is familiar with the psyche behind those mistakes, and the musical delivers that psyche to us at every turn. Because the audience understands Darry Curtis and how hard it is for him to hold on, the audience also has more understanding and forgiveness for when he’s spiralling. It’s also just a more specific proof of his plight — three songs with first-hand, emotionally explicit lyrics penetrate the uninvested understanding a lot easier than a second-party description of circumstances. Due to its nature and promotion of Darry’s importance, the musical simply gets more freedom to show an arguably more realistic version of him.

Also, I do believe that Darry in the musical is just that much closer to the edge than he is in the book, which is a valid character choice in an inherently emotional and transformative medium such as the musical adaptation 🤷🏻‍♀️

[0-amateur-writer-0]

Lines

Characters: Stan Pines, Ford pines.

Tags: Angst, Hurt no comfort, Character study.

Wordcount: 1,810

Summary:

“You really don’t understand why I want this place to be shut down, do you?”

Stan sniffs. “I think I got some ideas.”

Ford narrows his eyes. “Do you?”

#

He’s home. He’s actually home. Back in his Earth—in Gravity Falls, Oregon.

Hard to believe that a few days ago, he was at the precipice of life and death. About to end things once, and for all with Bill. That’s how it was supposed to be. One way or another, everything was supposed end that day. But now he’s honest to God walking through his house. Opening cupboards, and drawers. Studying every nook, and cranny. Observing how much has changed, and how much has stayed the same.

The house definitely had seen better days. Everything was aged, and weathered. You could even spot some awkward patch jobs here, and there. The ones you do on your own to save money, instead of by someone who actually knew what they were doing.

Indeed, Stan must’ve been a stingy on the upkeep. He could hear a lot of new creaks, and sounds now. But…the house is somewhat neat, and tidy at least.

He supposes he should be thankful if for that. That his home is still here after all this time. Still standing. Still livable. When he already made peace long ago, that his house would be left to rot—reduced to a pile of would-be firewood.

Ford rounded a corner, and stops in his tracks. Any feelings of gratitude he had had quickly went down the drain.

Now this is a change he could really do without.

The house doubles as a hokey tourist trap now. One that’s entire gimmick was based on showcasing a variety of very made-up anomalies.

Being in this room is already starting to royally piss him off. Though for some reason that escapes him, he decided to stay and look around. Making his way the first exhibit that caught his eye.

Ford glares at the taxidermized monstrosity before him. It was obviously meant to resemble sasquatch, or even bigfoot. Brown fur, big feet, and ape-like features, though a striking difference could be seen on how it’s…wearing an underwear.

(Why even? What evolutionary need could it possibly fulfill by wearing one?)

“Sascrotch,” He sneers. “I can’t believe people actually—"

“Yeah, ya don’t like the Shack. We get it. Keep steppin’, and move on already.” A gruff voice piped up from his left.

Ford turns his head to the source of said voice, to find Stan leaning against the counter—counting the money he made off from the last group of tourists.

(Has he always been there?)

“You really don’t understand why I want this place to be shut down, do you?”

Stan sniffs. “I think I got some ideas.”

Ford narrows his eyes. “Do you?” He challenges.

Stan muttered something under his breath, but otherwise did nothing but continue to count the money in his hands. The sound of paper bills being shuffled seemed to fill the empty gift shop. It grated on his nerves. Then again, everything that Stan does seem to grate on his nerves these days.

Ford made his way to the next set of exhibits. The Six Pack O’ Lope. The Cornicorn. He swears some of them looked more like one of Mabel’s arts and crafts projects.

“I have spent most of my life studying the weird. Trying to make sense of the nonsense. Trying to prove their existence to the scientific community.”

“I had to take on twelve PhDs to get people to take me seriously. Twelve. And that wasn’t even accounting the number of favors, and good standing I had to build up just so I could get my grant approved by the committee.”

Of course, I could’ve avoided all that if I had gone to West Coast Tech instead. He almost wanted to say, but quickly bit his tongue.

“Well, that’s kinda’ dumb.” Stan comments.

(If his ears weren’t mistaken, Ford could’ve sworn there was a note of genuine sympathy in Stan’s voice.)

Ford just shook his head. “The committee didn’t see my want to research anomalies as top priority. Especially when compared to things like researching the cure for cancer, or alternative energy, or artificial intelligence and whatnot.”

“But one way, or another. I managed to show them my worth. I gave them reason, after reason as to how my research could be beneficial. And eventually, they decided to give me a chance.”

Ford wrinkled his nose when he passes by some shelves filled with tacky souvenirs. One lined with snow globes, another with Mr. Mystery bobbleheads, and another filled with…ugh, those horrific Burpin’ Stanford Pines figurines. Though he stops when he comes across a nearly empty shelf lined with empty glass jars. A sign nearby tells him that these are ‘invisible fairy companions! Only $35!’.

His attention wasn’t on the obvious scam in front of him. Instead, Ford watches his face being reflected on the glass jars.

“I thought,” he says. “If I did all of that, then…maybe I could finally change the way people view them.”

“I wasn’t hoping to change everyone’s minds, but if I could get a few people to stop looking at them like something to be afraid of. Like something to be pointed, and gawked at…” He pauses, and then turns to look at Stan. “Do you see where I’m going with this?”

Stan just stares at him with a blank expression on his face.

(Dear Tesla, does he really have to spell this out?)

Ford took a deep calming breath, before saying: “What you’re doing here with the Mystery Shack. Not only is it a mockery of my life’s work, it’s a mockery of me.”

Stan narrows his eyes. “What are you talkin’ about?”

Ford could feel the threads of his self-control being cut. “Do you really not realize what you’re doing here!? You’re bringing all sorts of people in here, and teaching them it’s okay to point, and laugh at things they don’t understand. You’re teaching them to point, and laugh at things like me!”

Ford clicked his tongue. Whether Stan’s earlier confusion was genuine, or an act mattered little to him at the moment. The damage was done. To his house. To his reputation. To his life’s work.

--You’re a six-fingered freak!

And they would be right. That’s all he is. All he will ever be.

He’d lost the chance to ever prove them wrong.

“Be honest,” Ford demanded. “All those times you told me that I wasn’t a freak was a lie, wasn’t it?” He gestures towards the various exhibits in the Shack. “This is how you actually feel about me.”

“Do you also have stuffed six-fingered hand lying around? I’m surprised I haven’t seen it yet. An exhibit like that will surely—"

“You think I’d do that?” Stan asks.

Ford pauses, and then turns to Stan. And once his eyes landed on his brother, the red mist that clouded his vision seemed to dissipate at that moment.

Stan was staring at him, and though his expression was blank—there was a gamut of emotions swirling in the depths of his brother’s eyes. Raw and honest emotions that Ford didn’t want to look too closely into.

“You really think I’d do that to you?” Stan asks again. His voice quiet.

Ford opens his mouth, but he quickly finds that no words could come out. Something in Stan’s eyes. Something in the way his brother spoke, seemed to sap all the remaining fight and anger in him.

“I used to beat up every single punk who bad-mouthed you when we were kids. And ya really think that I’m gonna’ turn around, and start doin’ all that crap they did to you?” A pause. “You really think that I’m no better than guys like Crampelter?”

Ford’s looks down—suddenly finding it hard to look Stan in the eyes. “That isn’t what I…”

He tries to find something to defend himself with, but nothing kept coming up. After all, that was essentially what he had just implied wasn’t it?

The silence hung between them until Stan took several steps forward, only stopping when he’s at an arms-length in front of Ford.

“…Y’know,” Stan says. “I got a lotta reasons for starting the Mystery Shack. And that thing you just said… You think that folks come through here to point and laugh at all these arts and crafts rejects. But the only thing being pointed and laughed at in here…is me.”

“Cause you wanna’ know something?” He jabbed a finger onto Ford’s chest. “Just because you got no problems callin’ me worthless, that doesn’t mean I’m gonna’ stoop to your level and start callin’ you a…”

It took everything in him to not look away—to return Stan’s glare head on. On the outside, one might mistake him for being the picture of indifference. The only thing anyone could see was a mask of cold, hard disapproval plastered on his face

But on the inside, in the deepest parts of him where no one was privy to—part of him dreaded of what’s to come. The part of him that used to go on adventures with Stan on the beach. The part of him that used to spend whatever free time available, to work on an old derelict sailboat. The part of him that used stay up to the late hours of the night talking, and planning about the places they’d sail away to one day.

That part of him was terrified of his twin brother calling him that word.

But he knew it was coming. It’s only a matter of time. He braces himself and…

…nothing happened.

Stan just looks down, his hand falling limply back to his side. And Ford found himself letting out a breath he didn’t even knew he was holding.

Both men stood at the middle of the empty gift shop. Stan kept looking down at the floor, and Ford couldn’t seem to peel his eyes away from his brother—at how tired, and defeated he looked. His right-hand twitches, and then starts to lift and inch itself closer towards Stan.

He didn’t really know what he was trying to do. He just…has a sudden urge to reach out. But before he could make any contact, Stan took a step back from him.

“Believe it or not, I actually got lines I ain’t never gonna’ cross.” Was all Stan said to him, before he made his way outside.

The front door slammed shut.

Ford watches the door for a moment. Before his gaze, inexplicably, wanders back to the shelf lined with those Burpin’ Stanford Pines toys. It was an insult. It was his name being printed on those boxes, but looking at those figurines again—at how it was wearing a bright red fez, and a black tuxedo…the similarities that he somehow hadn’t seen before became so clear.

It was Stan.

Ford pinches the bridge of his nose. “What the hell am I doing?”

[the-meat-machine]

The thing about postcanon Dirk/Rose is that Ult Dirk needs Rose way, way more than Rose needs him. Dirk is trying desperately to convince himself, and us, and Rose, that Rose is in the same position he is. But she isn't, and I think on some level Dirk knows it.

This line really struck me in my Epilogues reread:

Kanaya loves Rose, but sometimes love just isn’t enough. Sometimes what you need is understanding.

Because, the thing is, this line isn't really about Kanaya and Rose. It's about Jake and Dirk. And it becomes obvious when compared with another line from later on where Dirk talks about his relationship with Rose:

We’re family. We belong together. And after years of micromanaging the inconsistent and confused desires of total imbeciles, wouldn’t it be a relief to have someone by my side who understood me?

So here's what I think is going on. Dirk feels desperately, desperately alone. His ascension to Ultimate Self-hood is making him aware of all sorts of dire shit. He's becoming aware of his status as a fictional character and the tenuous position of the "canon" he's from. He's "drowning in his own dismal persona", as he once put it in canon. And no one fucking gets it, least of all the man he loves.

Because it's clear that Jake could never, ever understand what Dirk is going through. He does not understand Dirk. Will not understand Dirk. Willfully chooses to avoid understanding Dirk at every turn. And Dirk is so, so tired of it.

And then Dirk starts to get to know Rose better, and… they just click. They truly are kindred spirits in many ways. They have similar senses of humor, similar interests, similar ways of viewing the world. And most importantly, Rose is ascending too. She will soon be in a position to understand what's going on at the same level Dirk does. She'll be able to understand him. And Dirk needs understanding so desperately.

But there's a problem, and that problem is that, while Dirk feels that he doesn't have anyone else who can understand him, the same isn't true for Rose. Because Kanaya does understand her. Maybe not completely. Maybe she'll never fully be able to grasp the metaphysical implications of Rose's ascension. But, importantly, she tries to understand, in a way Jake would never do for Dirk.

And so Dirk knows that, in order for his plan to work, in order to convince Rose to come with him, he has to prevent Kanaya from getting to her at all costs. Because no matter how much he tries to tell himself that Rose would feel the same way he does even without his influence, he knows that if Rose had to choose between him and Kanaya, she would choose Kanaya in a heartbeat.

So he prevents Kanaya from reaching Rose, manipulates Kanaya into telling Rose that she should leave her and go with Dirk. And he suborns Rose's will into his own. He does everything he can to make her part of him. Because in the end, the only way Dirk Strider can understand to not be alone is to gaze at himself in the mirror.

I'll leave you with a quote from Candy:

ROSE: There’s no one who understands me like you, Kanaya. No one who looks at me the way you do. No one who brings me back down to earth with ceaseless, brutal honestly like you. ROSE: I have no idea what’d I’d do without you. KANAYA: You Would Probably Do Just Fine ROSE: Yes, but I’d be very unhappy.

[sonkitty]

The Earthly Objects Game (Good Omens 2)

Find the newest Earthly Objects material here: The Earthly Objects Game ... "You can't just manifest and cause trouble, there are rules." -Crowley, Good Omens 2, Episode 5 (The Ball)

(Crowley was blurry from the back when he really said that so the above screenshot is from the lines right before)

This post was last updated 01/10/2024.

Much of this post is some heavily involved theorizing. However, the Threshold Tricks existing actually supports a lot of this theorizing. I make mistakes nonetheless. Please keep that in mind. I am still confident in the Threshold Tricks, if nothing else.

The Game

This story has rules or at least some notable patterns resembling an expected script from its characters. We're going to call them "rules" for now and acknowledge that rules can and most certainly will be broken.

Crowley and Aziraphale have a heightened awareness of these rules compared to everyone else, at least in the present day and in this story. I will be focusing my attention there since the minisodes are more difficult to follow for me. Who made the rules? It could be them or God or a book or game they've been put into. I refer to this thing as a game because that's more my understanding of it than what it actually is. Most characters aren't really playing. They follow the rules on instinct.

Even season 1 has certain resembling factors to this game that I found. God at least did use the phrase "ineffable game" herself.

Both Crowley and Aziraphale are experts, but Crowley is astoundingly impressive at how he plays this game.

I call the game Earthly Objects due to the use of that phrase in episode 1 and the touching even shown during that segment. Plus, of what the mechanics of this game seem to do. If this game has another name, it is The Rule of Three, or something like that. The number 3 is vital to this game.

Points

The way the game seems to work is that, for a great deal of the story, it wants 3 points to start a scene. Some scenes even get chains of three points, but such chains are quite hard to spot.

When two characters interact, the story usually wants each of them to earn one point of that given set.

When it comes to a solo scene, the story still wants 3 points from that one character.

Points are simplifying things, and even simplified, they are dependent on context, timing, and placement around thresholds.

Things grow ever more complex with more characters involved.

Earthly Objects

Earth has objects, often thought of by humans as tangible objects. In this story, earthly does not mean solid, and touch does not mean direct skin or clothing contact. They are the most easily evident and likely common methods. The touch depends on how it is done and the nature of the object in question. Checking a watch for the time is an earthly object touch because that is how you use a watch on Earth.

We see three earthly objects in the show's opening before Earth even exists. Those objects are a crank, a scroll, and a book. One of them, the book, is touched through a supernatural method but still touched.

One touched earthly object is equal to one point. It can be held during a character interaction and still count in many contexts.

These are basic earthly objects, for a few examples; see more at the end:

Chairs

Windows

Tables

Walls

Books

Mirrors

Cups

Doorknobs

Bodies of living natural beings (humans and goats for example)

Blurs

Blurs seem to indicate a possible pass or share when studying how windows work.

When a character is blurred, that seems to mean a pass or that the next clear view of them will confirm the results of their touch during the preceding blur.

Thresholds

Thresholds are largely understood to be doors.

Most characters in Good Omens 2 will not concern themselves with the intricacies of only the door part that serves as the door. They'll just use the doorknob, get their point, and move on—provided the camera saw it, that is.

This story has other non-door thresholds, such as the edge of the sidewalk.

Crowley, one of the show's two main characters, does concern himself with the above-mentioned intricacies. It goes well beyond anything we see other characters do in the entire season. For example, he is capable of doing what I have decided to call Multiplicative Threshold Tricks.

Here is a post I made on the subject:

Earthly Objects Study - Multiplicative Threshold Tricks (Good Omens 2).

These are an incredibly special type of set compared to how the usual points are earned on earthly objects themselves. If the points system really is as simple as 3 total for one set, then the Threshold Tricks require a minimum of 6 points due to their involvement with thresholds.

Aziraphale may not manipulate thresholds on the same level, but he is aware and involved in at least some of the Tricks. In fact, at the story's end, he actually has his own part to play after The Door Trick is complete. I believe it is supposed to be called The Door Catch.

To further clarify and return to other matters, characters can touch earthly objects on thresholds, such as doorknobs, door handles, push plates, shades, windows, mirrors, the astragal for double doors, and so on. The panel serving its function as mainly the door itself is different. It can be touched...but it's not an earthly object touch. It is the threshold itself or enough of the threshold itself to not be considered earthly.

Thresholds seem to require certain timing that I definitely haven't watched every scene to log as if the interaction happened properly or not. The main thing I can say is that a lot of "Hello" lines happen while a character is crossing a threshold (or maintaining place in one), before the sound effect of a door closing completes.

Windows have a remarkable threshold component different from doors and will have a link explaining such further down.

Vary Technique

The story does not want the characters to use the same exact technique twice on the same type of earthly object touch to earn a point, in a different later scene. It can be similar but should have some variation. An easy example is Shax knocks on the window using her knuckles at Crowley’s car, then later knocks on a window to the bookshop with just an index finger.

I most certainly have not verified this, just noticed subtle variations when looking for these things. Crowley's Threshold Tricks have a pattern that I do believe is intended to be, "Never do the same trick twice."

Awareness

I'm convinced Crowley and Aziraphale are aware of the rules and making choices about them, but that doesn't mean they know every move they are making that is following the rules.

When Crowley shoots out lightning in episode 1, the lightning itself still actually follows the rules with three different touches on the door to the coffee shop. I don't think Crowley did that on purpose or even knows it happened. But it did happen.

Still, his choices in most, or at least quite a bit, of his movement during the story do appear to be deliberate choices.

Earth

The surface upon which characters stand and walk is the Earth. They can touch the Earth to earn a point, but it requires a little more effort, such as hopping. The hopping might require the feet touch the ground at different times.

Let's check in with our experts.

Crowley hops in place in episode 1 before shooting out lightning. He also hops while talking to Muriel before the scene ends in episode 6. In both cases, the feet do not touch the ground at the same time.

Aziraphale deliberately avoids a point in episode 6 when he makes sure to step backwards off a rug onto the floor in episode 6. No points for stepping backwards onto Earth. Or at least he didn't earn a point for walking partly on a rug.

When Crowley is walking on the sidewalk and passing by the coffee shop in episode 1, he does the following to earn two points, not even in the same set believe it or not. The first thing he does is rotate his body, such that his left foot is fully on the ground, but his right foot isn't. Instead, only the heel touches the ground. As such, he gets the point because the heel is touching the ground. He's not just standing. After he fixes the power, the camera shows that his left foot is already off the sidewalk and moving to the road. He gets a point for the step because he's not just walking on the sidewalk, then the road. He's stepping from the sidewalk to the road. It might help that the edge of a sidewalk is a threshold. His second step after crossing the threshold has the foot conveniently cut off from the camera.

What about running? The only example I can think of is Crowley running as he enters the bookshop but then he seems to shift into a skip. The camera doesn't see both feet fully the whole time though. So, for that one, I'm not really sure.

Clothing and Accessories

Clothing is regarded as enough of a character's self that just wearing clothes is not enough. They can earn points for touching their clothes actively during a scene, such as Nina touching her clothes while talking to Crowley in episode 5 after he comments on the name of her coffee shop.

Not any touch will do. It seems it also must be done in specific ways.

Crowley has a special way that he uses his pants pockets for The Pocket Trick. That way is really, really hard to understand. I can't keep up. However, from what I do understand, the threshold-only touch is not during the entire cut. There is a puzzle to solve and find the actual threshold-only touch within a given frame or few frames.

As such, when he's not at that exact point, he seems regarded as touching his clothes as an earthly object touch based on two interactions he has in episode 2.

In episode 2, he is walking with his hand in his pocket and thumb out. As he moves, the back of his jacket is touching over his hand. Soon after, Nina initiates an interaction with him. Not long after that, he's walking again and encounters Aziraphale. Crowley himself speaks. At that point, the touch comes from behind the hand.

Aziraphale, I think, puts his hands in and out of his pockets in episode 1, not instantly, so not sure if in, out, or both would count.

Accessories probably also depend on how and when they are touched.

Crowley’s sunglasses are a special type of accessory, so here is a post with more extensive info:

Earthly Object Study - Crowley’s Sunglasses (Good Omens 2)

In short, sometimes the sunglasses can be used as an accessory for the game but not always.

Due to how the story ends, I suspect the clothing and accessory rules are not as simple as just letting two interacting characters to touch only such things with a scene as extensive as the bookshop scene between Crowley and Aziraphale at the end of episode 6. The story cares about context, and there is some big time context happening in that scene.

Humans

Humans are earthly objects. As such, they can do self-touches, such as clasping their hands. Again, not any touch will do. It probably has to be done in a specific way, not that many humans would have this issue.

Maggie is the show's prime example as she uses this method quite frequently. She might be a special type of human based on other things we observe in the show, but the story considers her human enough to allow this method nonetheless.

Supernatural Beings

If a supernatural being is actively touching an earthy object, they can, like humans, do self-touches. I am sometimes not sure if they already can, but Crowley's self-touches during the ball invitations in episode 5 strongly suggest this idea is true. For when it seems like they are not touching anything, there is probably something else specifically within the scene that's allowing it anyway.

Miracle touches onto earthly objects are allowed. Crowley changing three traffic lights from red to green at the same time? That's an earthly object touch.

Supernatural beings are allowed reciprocal touches between each other, such as a fist bump or holding hands. Kissing is probably allowed though the one kiss shown has exceptional circumstances with a lot of other touching deliberately not happening.

Windows

Windows are easy to overlook because once you do take the time to study them in their more complex use, they are by no means easy to understand.

Here's a messy post about mostly a few more complex scenes involving windows:

Earthly Objects Study - Windows

Here is another one focused on how The Window Trick is done:

Earthly Objects Study - Windows Part 2 (Good Omens 2)

I didn't know it was The Window Trick when I wrote it.

Chairs

Aziraphale has a mysterious vendetta against the backs of chairs ever since Gabriel interrupted Aziraphale from listening to music. The chair he sits in when talking to Crowley about wanting help looking after Gabriel seems to be the main exception.

Aziraphale's got no visible back of a chair in the coffee shop or the pub, maybe other places, and even in the bookshop, when he is sitting in a chair, his back is not in the back of the chair most or all of the time. I don’t care enough to confirm every scene. It's weird.

This mystery suggests there is a point for the back to the chair that he is simply adamant to not earn. I am not sure if and how this is related to Varying Technique mentioned above.

There are plenty of other ways to earn points from chairs. It mainly needs to make sense for how a chair would be touched, such as using an arm rest.

Knock

Knocking on a window probably earns a point, provided the camera sees it. When Gabriel knocks on the door in episode 1? Not sure. The camera saw it, but the eventual response takes awhile. A blur might make it a pass. It's hard to tell.

Hands

Hands are complex and apparently there might be rules about the number of digits used on certain types of touches. If the touch is standard for one index finger and one index finger and thumb, it's probably fine.

Otherwise, generally check for at least 3 digits for one hand, at least 6 for two hands. Watch how the fingers are extended, curled, or consistency with each other. If you like trying to figure out this game, it actually does help you to see how the instinctual players still play differently from each other. Michael is far more likely to extend their fingers and use them broadly than Uriel, for example.

Crowley messes with this rule a lot. It seems he cares which touch is credited how. It’s not enough to earn points. It goes something like the park bench should earn the point so the newspaper can act as his own personal threshold until he decides otherwise.

Thumb tips are particularly important when it comes to managing thresholds.

I don't know if I'll ever figure the hand mechanics out fully myself.

Dialogue Points

Most interactions will not have both characters touching something. Instead, the characters follow dialogue patterns for the other points.

They tend to go something like the following:

Hello

Questions

Names

Statement of Place (might just be an extended form of "Hello")

Foreign Language

Combinations of hello, names, and questions are common. Two questions might even be enough for two points.

Hello

When Aziraphale enters the record shop for the first time in episode 1, he touches the window of the door twice, and says "Hello Maggie," before the sound effect of the door closing completes.

When Maggie enters the coffee shop, using the doorknob, Nina says "Hello" while holding plates with cups and before the sound effect of the door closing completes.

Equivalents such as "Hi there," are allowed.

"Excuse me," the show's opening words, are probably also allowed.

Question

"Yes? Was that you?"

"Seats? Mr. Fell, where are the seats I dropped off for the meeting?"

"Who are you? Who sent you?"

"What are you doing?"

Names

Titles in place of names seem to be acceptable.

"I don't know why you invited me, Mr. Fell."

"Officer, I need to report a crime."

"Jim, I'll need eight battery-operated candles."

Statement of Place

“I’m here.”

“I’m back.”

“You’re back.”

“You’re in trouble.”

“Oh, we’re going to the pub! You never go to the pub!”

“We are at war! Finally.”

"I think you know why we're here."

Statements such as these seem to be regarded as a type of "Hello". "I'm here" is said by Gabriel once he's opened the doors to the bookshop and steps out. When Aziraphale says, "You came back," to Crowley in episode 6, the doors are still open and closed just after he says it. He is otherwise not touching anything, not saying a question, not saying a number, not saying a name, and not speaking in a foreign language.

When Shax says, "You're in trouble," the window is open.

The "We are at war!" line is after the doors are closed, but since Dagon is in the group with Beelzebub who enters with fire, that seems to be the acceptable form of an earthly object touch combined with this "Hello" from Hell.

Numbers

If characters can say numbers, and I am increasingly convinced they can, that's a lot they can get away with. Numbers are everywhere, just like names and questions.

Foreign Language

When watching the show in English, characters talking in a foreign language is, I think, touching an earthly object. It's significant enough that Mrs. Cheng never has to touch anything except a fan when she is at the ball and talking in English.

Groups

Blurs make this harder to understand now that I know blurs exist and seem to have some kind of pass or share effect.

The story's going to go by some level of context with who is in the scene.

For something like the scene in the bookshop with the powers of Heaven and Hell, those groups are of 3 or more characters.

For that it, seemed only one character from a group is required to initiate the interaction on a group’s behalf. In episode 6, Crowley represents himself and the four angels who came with him. He does a hello and a question through an open threshold. The touch will come soon but not yet. Aziraphale says, “You’re back,” and then gets to represent the group of him, Jim/Gabriel, Maggie, and Nina. Muriel, who was in the group with Crowley, closes the doors. Crowley touches Shax’s shoe while Shax is unconscious on the couch. As such, Crowley gets the earthly object touch on the couch through Shax or on the shoe thanks to Shax being on a couch. For all I know, he gets both.

Dagon, Furfur, and Beelzebub arrive. I think Beelzebub’s fire is supposed to be an earthly object touch for their group, and Dagon says, “We are at war!” If I’m right, this third group still needed an earthly object touch, possibly because the doors were closed by that point. Additionally, when Beelzebub awakens Shax with lightning, Shax ends up both touching the couch and having books fall on her, so she gets touches in as well.

Chains

Chains exist in this game, as already noted.

Sometimes you'll see the three points to start a scene, then you might actually see another immediate or at least relatively soon three points, and so on.

They are really hard to spot, so I'm skeptical it's a full-scale requirement for the game, but it's much more dominant than I realized. Or, the dialogue makes it hard to spot because some dialogue is allowed to carry on instead of the non-dialogue touches. I don't know why that happens for some scenes and not others.

The most obvious chain I've seen, that led me to believe they exist, is the scene between Crowley and Gabriel in episode 5 when Gabriel is fiddling with the lamp.

Upon first realizing there might be a chain there, I thought that might makes it one of the most real scenes to the story even if Crowley might have an underlying intent to draw out his own demonic energy there. That also came from observing some basic rule-breaking that I'll note further down.

Then again, maybe not. I believe the scene with Crowley shooting out lightning is part of a chain too, but it's far more complex because of the window. There are still some notably suspicious fake things happening in the background once Nina realizes she and Maggie are locked in.

Zoomed Touches

Do not trust these things at face value, even if they are mostly avoided in the latter half of episode 6. I think most of them are supposed to be valid, but there are at least two you should not trust before that point.

Don't trust the zoom on Crowley's sunglasses next to a plate of Eccles cakes, even if there are three fingers visibly and clearly picking them up. There was a fake Crowley before that, and even the real Crowley is only holding them with two digits initially upon exiting through the bookshop doors as he puts them on. After a human passes by, then he switches to holding the sunglasses with more digits. That human is the hint of where the fake sequence ends.

The other zoom to not trust is Crowley holding the box in episode 6. Once he turns that box over, his thumb is avoiding touching it on purpose. He has the index and middle fingers together with their tips. Meanwhile, the ring finger can be found on camera but is deliberately separate from the other two and not clearly showing its tip.

In both cases, I think touches likely happened, but those are supposed to be a way of the story telling on its own deception. Gabriel probably arrived with a cardboard box at least twice. In the first draft of the story, the message written on the box may have been different.

Illusionary Touches

These things are new to me since I only noticed them when studying pocket touches. In The Pocket Trick, Crowley can't just do an illusionary touch whenever or wherever. He has to meet certain requirements involving timing and framing.

Theoretically, if such things are allowed for earthly objects, they are not as strict. However, I don't have much to go on and never really noticed. I had assumed things you would know would be an illusion, would not actually count.

Crowley's Name

Crowley's name usage, or lack thereof, is just flat out odd in the whole story, but if there is a rule, it's something like neither Crowley nor Gabriel are ever allowed to say Crowley's name. No exceptions.

For Crowley, this theoretical rule applies to all time periods shown in the season 2 story.

For more on just how odd the usage is, please see my post here. Be sure to check my own reblogs to that post as well.

Players Section Link

Sideburns

I don't mention the sideburns much in this entire post since I have a whole other extensive post about them. However, they are relevant to this game in that whatever is going on with them uses the mechanics of Earthly Objects. Even so, it seems to be its own game with a scheme at work from both Crowley and Aziraphale. You can find more here: The Sideburns Scheme.

Rule Following

A fascinating example I've found of rule-following by Crowley and Aziraphale is when Muriel intrudes on them. I can’t fully explain the mechanics of the rules because like I said, I really do think Crowley is an expert at this game. Whatever is happening here is advanced stuff. I'm going to walk you through what he does to get this scene where it needs to go. He does it with style.

Before Muriel intrudes, Aziraphale had already made sure to have a cup of tea visibly touching his hands to start the scene in the room. Crowley poses to indicate he is touching a blurred stack of books in the room, even if Aziraphale's body obscures confirmation of that touch while Aziraphale closes the door. Crowley's left arm is shown as him placing a hand on his hip. During their conversation, Crowley's right arm keeps telling us he's still touching that stack and not moving away from it. Blurs, I believe at this point, allow a pass, and so this one seems to be allowing some kind of pass and then hold so long as Crowley keeps at it.

The story lets him without confirming that is the touch on camera. We are never going to see that confirmation. He displays his left arm and even says, "One fabulous kiss, and we're good," as if that's a clue he is allowed that one time to show that one arm until a certain thing is going to happen. That left arm returns to implying its previous touch as well.

Crowley has an earthly object prepared for the scene. He fully intends to give over those keys despite his grumbling. It might be very important that the car keys earn a specific point because they move the story along.

Ready for the pass, he has those keys in his left hand, skin contact and all, perhaps a little blurry on a camera from behind him, but still, he's got them.

Muriel opens the door, crosses past the threshold of this private conversation, and says, "All done?" No earthly objects. No hello. No knocking. We have an outright intrusion here! At least there was a question, but it might not have been enough due to what Crowley does.

Crowley pulls the keys back toward himself immediately. From the view behind Muriel, his pose is returned to match what it was when Aziraphale closed the door at the start of the scene even though Muriel's blocking the blurred stack of books.

Aziraphale's frustrated because of the rules. Crowley is going to do several things to handle this situation.

First, Crowley smiles and answers Muriel, then asks Muriel about being interested in humans being in love. That’s a question. Then he even stops Muriel from saying names. He's saying the names himself, so his implied hold with both arms might be allowing him to keep dragging out a lot of the dialogue until he gets what he wants. Assuredly, Aziraphale seeming to get quite turned on by this talk is about the love, but he's also watching the master of this game at work.

Eventually, Muriel brings out a notepad and pen. That's two earthly objects. Between both Muriel and Crowley, that interaction meets the requirements, regardless of the initiating question from the whole intrusion. Aziraphale has kept quiet the whole time though he at least smiles. Crowley's left arm readies itself for what comes next. His right arm is still implying the touch behind him.

Muriel's eyes move their attention from Crowley to the notepad. Spanning only a few frames after this shift, Crowley's blurred hand shows the keys for the touch and tosses the keys toward Aziraphale. Without checking frame by frame, it looks instant based on the notepad, not the eye movement from Muriel. He knew exactly what he was doing.

Aziraphale manages the catch, thankfully. You can tell he was nervous and is grateful. He winks. That gives one point to him for the keys in his hand and another point for the wink as a self-touch since he’s a supernatural being holding an earthly object. The pair need one last point.

Muriel's attention remains on their notepad for the entire toss.

Crowley's right arm maintains its implied touch throughout the entire scene, even after the toss is done. He does one last thing to close it all out. He gives a sour grimace to allow his cheeks an active touch on his new sunglasses. At least, I think that's how the sequence is intended to be.

So, my current guess is that the scene is three different interactions. The first is between Aziraphale and Crowley. They already had their points but the story doesn’t want just points (or, as noted, the implied touch may have allowed some kind of hold). Those keys needed a relevant pass between these two players. Muriel’s intrusion reset things, so that another interaction of three points between Crowley and Aziraphale was necessary.

Crowley takes over to be the one character to interact with Muriel, get them their own points without involving the keys in this intentionally isolated interaction. His precise timing is impressive. Then there’s the third sequence covered above (keys, wink, grimace). To help keep these interactions separate, Muriel should not see the pass.

Rule Breaking - Basic

Likely Fake Crowley, who is probably Aziraphale, passing a cardboard box and no dialogue is breaking the rules. Soon after is a blurry figure who I’m guessing is still a fake. The figure picks up sunglasses and avoids an obvious plate of Eccles cakes. These cuts are likely part of an edit. There are two earthly objects emphatically not touched. Gabriel is nowhere to be found, but the more clear fake had long sideburns. In the next bookshop scene, the plate has disappeared, and the cardboard box has been moved.

Crowley, Saraqael, and Muriel walking to the Heaven elevator is likely an edit because it also breaks the rules. There are no earthly object touches, no dialogue, and suddenly Michael and Uriel are in the elevator later. That one's probably obvious to others, but still. There were no touches is my point. Crowley didn't hop or run, and Saraqael never takes their finger off their joystick for their wheelchair. There were even avoided touches in the cut right before it. I have a gut feeling that Saraqael is not an expert but at least a little more attuned to these rules and would earn a touch point if they wanted. And Crowley certainly knows his way around on earning these points when he wants.

Rule Breaking and High Tier Play - The Final Fifteen

The rules of standard play and high tier play are contradictory, but I'm still going to say "rule-breaking" because I think it is important and fair in full context of what happens. There are touches, but things are still considerably different due to what is touched when. There is definitely a lack of touching on the number of earthly objects in the bookshop itself and even the street later.

Of the touches that do happen in the bookshop and street later, the kiss excluded, most of those are actually Crowley following the rules on the hidden higher tier of play on thresholds for his Threshold Tricks. You should read that link if you want to know more about what the tricks actually are.

The two main characters are the main ones breaking the rules though the Metatron is at least partially doing so as well. His play is completely off compared to everyone. Other characters will be shown, and they will be shown as still following the rules even though they have no further dialogue.

The rule-breaking seems to start when the Metatron looks toward the bookshop after talking to Muriel. If he's looking through a window, the story has decided we don't need a complex window scene then or during the entire conversation in the bookshop.

The first touch is a threshold-only one with Crowley removing his sunglasses. If my theory on the Sunglasses Trick is correct, that is actually the next-to-last touch Crowley is doing for the first of three Threshold Tricks that will complete by the end of the episode, after he completed two others before this latter half of episode 6.

However, the Sunglasses Trick is an extensive and questionable theory, even moreso than the tricks that follow it. What if it's wrong? Even if not wrong and partly for the trick to begin with, the nature of the touch is still notably different from the rest of the story and worth pointing out.

Threshold-only touches on the sunglasses have a general format that isn't like what is happening here. The sunglasses are usually detached from Crowley onto an earthly object if he removes them. If he does keep holding them or is not seen putting them on an earthly object, there are three preceding instances of a subtle demonic hiss to indicate he is using them as a demon addressing an angel, two of which happened in the present day with Gabriel.

Here, Crowley holds his sunglasses and will keep holding them until he puts them back on. There will be no demonic hiss. They are his door, and he is holding his door. They are emphatically not an earthly object or touching an earthly object by extension during his entire conversation with Aziraphale.

Both characters touch their clothes nervously but not in ways the rules seem to allow, such as how they manage their pockets.

Neither Crowley nor Aziraphale say hello or acknowledge that Aziraphale is back. Crowley skips straight ahead to having something to say that doesn't have the usual format. There is no name, no question, and so on. He even acknowledges they should be "talking about" and cuts himself off.

Aziraphale interrupts him, does include a question, but then actually answers it himself.

Most questions are given more care in allowing the other character a chance to respond.

Still, nothing they weren't already wearing is touched.

Soon after the usual initiating set of rules are broken, the cohesion of the story's narrative is broken. The present day has intentionally been moving the audience between one scene and the next to suggest events are following a given implied chronology and timeline of a few days. Gabriel arrived on Monday. Crowley looked exceptionally hot in a black turtleneck on Tuesday. Aziraphale went to Edinburgh on Wednesday. The ball was prepared for and happened on Thursday. They are currently experiencing things on this Friday.

We've had flashbacks since the start leading closer and closer to the present day, but not a single one of those flashbacks started in this manner of a present day narration to start the flashback. They've been memories playing out between the present day events. The other present day events have been mentioned in dialogue, not narrated. We go to a very recent scene that supposedly happened without us seeing it. Then Aziraphale chops it even more. "And I said, 'Me'? And then he said..." What kind of cut is that?! Broken I tell you. It's broken. Not with exact wording. I'm just pointing out the standard cohesion of the narrative before this point is emphatically broken here—maybe even on purpose. Even setting aside this game idea, we as the audience, are supposed to notice how jarring it is. It gives a heavy implication that Aziraphale is lying.

I question a lot of the dialogue throughout the scene, but it's too much for me and not really the focus with the touching and lacking touching.

Before the kiss happens, there is another threshold touch. Crowley puts his sunglasses back on. The thresholds to Crowley's sunglasses are the end pieces. He doesn't touch those as best can be managed but what he does touch is specifically the areas around them. Two fingers in front and back of each end piece with each hand. He is being protective of his door to the point he touched the thresholds of his own thresholds.

He could have chosen any number of other places to touch those sunglasses, but he chose there.

Additionally, this touch closes out the Sunglasses Trick, that started as far back as episode 1, if my theory on that trick has any merit. That is the first of his three Threshold Tricks for the end of the season. He started with opening both doors. Now he is closing both doors.

More dialogue is exchanged with no earthly object touches in between.

Finally, the kiss happens. By all appearances, it is an impulsive choice. Yet, that choice resembles a set if clothing touches were acceptable. Crowley grabs the lapels of Aziraphale's coat. That's touch #1. They kiss, and the kiss is reciprocated. That's touch #2. Aziraphale's hand touches Crowley's back with four fingers visible. That's touch #3. Aziraphale's nose might even be touching Crowley's sunglasses, but those things are a guarded door (so far as I'm concerned).

They make a connection with the kiss. This game is almost like a language they understand between each other. For me, the kiss is more about their love than rule-following or rule-breaking.

To remind themselves and/or us that rule-breaking is happening here, the scene immediately continues with an implied quick glance to the window by Aziraphale and continued rule-breaking in the dialogue ("I forgive you.";"Don't bother"). No further words are exchanged. Crowley leaves with a heavy implication of touching the door yet the doorknob is ever so carefully obscured from view as the sound effects inform us he left. Still, nothing they weren't already wearing was touched.

More happens. The Metatron returns, visibly using a doorknob, so there's an earthly object touch by him. However, everything's still a little off. Aziraphale happens to move his feet in specific ways around a small rug until there is a step backwards from it to the floor. He walks backwards onto a big rug, then does not move forward until the camera is no longer watching his feet.

The Metatron takes one hand out of a pocket to gesture toward a window, and the camera never shows when the hand goes back in. Muriel is shown through the window following rules, and while Aziraphale looks, the layout allows that he is not visibly behind the window pane where Muriel was either before or after the look.

Aziraphale manages to keep not touching earthly objects, mainly focus on his dialogue, make sure his feet move when they should move, and his arms and hands don't do too much. The Metatron isn't visibly touching or holding any earthly objects either. Both of them leave the bookshop without the camera actually showing the exit through the doors.

Crowley is shown standing at the door to his car, having positioned himself for his incoming trick.

Aziraphale and the Metatron talk some more. Then there is a miracle sound and a notable reaction from Aziraphale. He chances a look over toward Crowley.

When Crowley is shown in the third of three camera shots leading to that moment, he has completed The Door Trick. That is the second of his three tricks to finish in the episode.

Aziraphale has a follow-up chained in from that Trick that I call The Door Catch. I do believe the story intended to communicate that name due to how pocket touches work. They involve word play. The story had an extensive memory on The Bullet Catch in episode 4, so put the ideas together, and there you go.

Inside the elevator, there is one zoomed in touch of presumably the Metatron's finger on the button that could be the story meaning it is an earthly object touch. It's hard to trust with all the known deception in the story itself and how the touch doesn't happen with both his face and body on camera as is usually done with a doorknob for other characters. Such a thing was even shown earlier at the bookshop. Even if perfectly valid, the touch stands out. What is he, human? After studying pocket touches, which have a heavy human presence, I grow all the more suspicious he could be.

The Metatron was not shown crossing the threshold of entering the elevator, but Aziraphale is. The doors are not shown to close, but the implication from the music and sound effects is that they did. Aziraphale has successfully managed to still not touch any earthly objects himself. He is also framed in a specific way all-around that is related to pocket touch mechanics. I at least know what to look for, and I can tell you that his right arm is lined up with the Metatron's in a way that is significant because there is a vertex illusionary touch between them.

A little past that part being done, Crowley does The Window Trick. That is his third and final trick of the three of this latter half of episode 6.

Three Threshold Tricks for this part of the episode makes sense because of how much this game likes the number 3.

Once Crowley has those short sideburns again, something resembling earthly object touches starts. His blurred hand is shown gripping the steering wheel. Then the camera and frame he's in decide to hide it. Texture fades in over where he might be touching the passenger seat. A tiny bit of the driver's seat behind him is partly shown. The camera, lighting, and credits keep messing with the view.

Aziraphale just keeps standing and eventually smiles in a way that's not really encouraging, for me, when I'm sympathizing with Crowley. Admittedly, I do think Crowley has a strategy in motion, especially after examining his overall threshold manipulation during the story.

Whew.

Okay, time to move on.

Let's wrap up with some notes and a list. There is a bonus at the end saved for posterity. That was me starting to grasp at the first Multiplicative Threshold Trick.

Some Notes:

Skin contact is significant, both on earthly objects and on a threshold itself. It seems to have more power from Crowley when he has longest-length sideburns. In particular, I'm referring to three memory access points with Gabriel and The Door Trick. In the door trick, the skin contact touch is the one given a Triple with a Triple multiplier.

Gabriel has some skin contact in at least one of those same memory access points. Otherwise, I haven't figured out much besides Shax's notable avoidance in the present day storyline.

Rules are broken, and the season 2 story continues...until they're broken with great deliberation by two experts...who might be each on their way to Heaven and Hell respectively.

The one with the imagery of the Hell threshold has plants behind him, so some of Earth is still there.

Earthly Objects List

This list includes objects that may have had implied touches instead of actual touches because checking who touched what when, then realizing it's blurry or just presumed, is exhausting when I just want a list. I'm not going to specify every different type of paper that might have been touched...but you know...paper was touched.

Barrel

Bell

Bench

Blanket

Candle

Car seat

Cardboard box

Cards

Cart

Chair

Clipboard

Clothing

Counter

Cup

Feather duster

Hat

Human

Goat

Keys

Magnifying glass

Mail

Mirror

Newspaper

Paper

Pencil

Phone

Piano

Plastic bag

Plastic container

Plate

Rag

Record

Rock

Rug

Scroll

Steering wheel

Table

Towel

Wheelchair

Window

Wine bottle

Wooden box

Bonus Round: Me Bragging on Crowley

The below is saved for posterity because I had so much fun with it. I am quite convinced that this part was the first Multiplicative Threshold Trick and almost a tutorial because the others don't come, or at least finish, until much later and are far more difficult to recognize.

Look, I obsess over David Tennant being Crowley because he is so beautifully perfect for the role, so I am definitely super biased in everything here.

Allow me to attempt demonstrating to you how mind-blowing Crowley is at this game. We're not going to know if what I think happened, really happened, because I don't understand the rules the way he does. Here is what I think happened: He did three threshold-only touches while entering the coffee shop in episode 1. What does that accomplish? Why would he do that? I don't know! My current guess is maybe three in a row actually gives next-level supernatural points in the game, largely in part because of the season’s ending, which is too much to cover here.

Am I sure? Absolutely not, especially with how blurs seem to work between characters and the more standard earthly object touches.

The car arrives, and Crowley places only part of his shoe on the edge of the sidewalk. The heel doesn't touch the street, and the front tip doesn't touch the sidewalk. The movement is quick, so it's a little blurred. Theoretical threshold-only touch #1.

The camera pans up, and then you see his fingers on the side panel of his door that just so happen to only get maybe the window frame and not the window itself. It's blurry, but that's the best I can do. I also have to check frame by frame because it's too fast otherwise. So, if the window is the earthly object but not its frame, then we're good. He's touching both the door frame and the window frame so that could be a 2-in-1 touch. Theoretical threshold-only touch #2.

He closes the door, steps forward, does a spin, and then walks toward the coffee shop. When he gets to that door, his hand should be above the lock, and maybe it's a blurry gray thing, but it's so hard to tell. It's blurry. He's moving too fast. Even if he is touching it, he is covering it completely with his hand.

Since he covers it up fully with his palm, does it somehow not count? If so, then you can tell that his fingers are on the door panel only while his thumb is on the indentation of that panel connected to the window. The tip of his thumb is barely touching the window. The credit for the touch goes to the door panel instead of the window because the door panel has three of five digits from one hand on it whereas the window only has that one little thumb tip. Three digits on one panel could be a 3-in-1 touch. Theoretical threshold-only touch #3.

On entry, there is a fourth threshold that has no door, it’s just separating one section of the coffee shop to another. He passes through, passes Aziraphale, and sits down.

For some reason, he saves his starting two points for the arm on the back of the chair and the question, "Right., what's the problem?" Added in is an implied skin contact touch to the table, seen two cuts later.

The music and the camera work is really impressive in the whole thing, in my opinion. The story wants us to see that sequence in that way. What a beautiful entrance.

He's playing this game in tandem with his sideburns scheme, and there, he is definitely using thresholds to his advantage.

[mrsegbert]

Joker (Brian Azzarello) Meta

Somebody's probably already made this connection, but I think Joker uses Jonny Frost as a stand-in for Batman at multiple points in the Joker graphic novel. Especially because we see Joker talking to himself as if he were talking to Batman in the story, too.

Compare lines Joker says to Jonny (and Batman) near the end of the story. "You have no charm at all. Just... Obviousness. Dumb, dull... Obvious." And in certain moments throughout the story, Joker describes Jonny as having these qualities.

After Joker schedules a meeting with Tommy Bang Bang, Jonny tells Joker that telling Tommy that they're coming would mean potentially walking into a set-up. In reply, Joker says, "I don't mind you saying that Jonny. Sometimes, I need to hear the obvious." Near the end of the graphic novel, Joker asks Jonny if he knows what he hates. Jonny replies that Joker hates everything, and Joker says, "My, my... Is it you've learned a lot... Or you're smarter than you look?" Which implies Joker thinks of Jonny as unintelligent. (This is reaching, but during a drove at night, Joker asks what Jonny sees, and Jonny says, "lights." Joker then describes the lights as nothing more than pinpricks in darkness, which could connect to the dull descriptor.)

We can use these moments between Jonny and Joker to see how Joker feels about Batman. Most obviously, Joker describes Batman as obvious when he stated beforehand that he sometimes needs to hear the obvious - or rather, needs Batman. There are also multiple occasions where Joker acts toward Jonny similarly to how he does Batman. For example, screaming at Jonny, demanding to know if he thinks he's better than him, holding a gun to Jonny's head and asking if he's one of his problems, talking about a story of a man trying to complete an impossible mission, it being something he admires. And when Jonny doesn't understand what Joker is talking about, Joker treats it as Batman being the one who doesn't understand. "Of course not - he doesn't have a funny bone in his broken body."

There's also a recurring theme of apologies in the story. When they first meet, Joker tells Jonny to never apologize for the way he looks. Later on, Joker says what he actually hates most is apologies. When Joker and Batman finally confront one another, Joker tries to shame Batman - implying that Bruce has something to apologize for. Then, he shames Batman for the window he has for his mouth on his cowl - finding something wrong with the way he looks. "A glimpse at the perfection underneath. Obvious - the chiseled good looks - not the jaw, the mouth of a monster."

This hints at not only insecurity from The Joker but potentially some form of attraction. Not to mention - hypocrisy. Which isn't unusual considering the character, but it stands out all the same given what's he said about not apologizing for one's looks.

Ultimately, I think this version of Joker needs or feels he needs Batman, is almost always putting on a performance for him, admires him, wanting to talk to him or get through to him, but also feels a hatred for him. Maybe even envy. He doesn't want to feel like, or have it be that, Batman thinks he's better than him. And because Jonny is no longer a Batman stand-in, now that Joker can finally be with him again, Jonny is killed and tossed aside like trash - just like anyone who he considers beneath him and Batman.

Also, there's a moment near the end where Jonny laughs as he and Joker are fleeing, and Joker strikes him in the face. Potentially this might be because he felt like he was being mocked, or because it's something too "out of character" for Joker to continue projecting his nemesis onto Jonny.

[thewayuarent]

The main conflict of Sand and Ray

In my previous post about SandRay dynamic I was talking about Ray’s addiction and how it could influence their relationship. But this conflict is based on external factors - Ray's addiction, as the Sand’s savior syndrome are their important characteristics, but not so much the basis of their personalities as a consequence.

Third episode gave me an understanding of some key traits of their characters, which are the basis of their main, internal conflict. What I mean by that is they’ll have a lot of fights caused by some reason or another (addiction - possibly, Mew thing - definitely yes, financial status - maybe, whatever else I don’t know probably everything, this show is a mess) but all these fights are going to happen because they have completely different view on life.

Ray is living in the moment where tomorrow may never happen. In ep1 Sand make that comment

and personally, I’m not sure of Ray knows himself. He doesn’t think ahead. Moreover, he is prone to avoidance - his drinking in a way helps him not to think about what’s happening in his life. He actively seeks ways to not thinking.

So he finds Sand. I mean, of course he likes Sand, but what’s more important, he can turn all of his time and energy on that guy he knows for a couple of weeks or something. One night together and Ray immediately imprints on him like a baby duck? Sure, why not. They both agreed that will be one time thing? But it was good, they both want more, complexities what,

Sand, on the other hand, is basically opposite. He always thinks ahead. He gives up to the moments in ep 2, but he’s concerned about it immediately. He analyzes everything - Ray’s behavior and his problematic tendencies, his own reaction, their relationship - and I can guess comes to some disappointing conclusions.

He knows Ray is a problem. He knows relationship with Ray will be a problem. I find it very interesting to compare these two lines:

Ray is almost in self-defense mode he’s basically like “Oh no I gave mixed signals so this guy may think I’m into him but I’m so obviously not” (yes you are)

Where Sand is saying “I know you are problematic and I don’t need that in my life” (with those eyes yep I believe you)

So he resists. He reminds them both about their status as friends in (almost)every dialogue they have in this episode.

Except for this one. My boy, you are flirting hard, is there something with the air or what?

So he knows things can go off the rails very easy very fast. But he gives in to Ray - not once, but twice. Because while he can understand what’s bad for him, he’s still prone to it. Letting everything go and living in a moment is very attractive idea and I can get Sand easily here.

The problem is, he just can’t afford it. Sand is in a constant survival mode. He have several jobs, he does illegal stuff for money and he has no option but to think through every aspect of his life. He can’t just control some parts of it and let go on others, he needs clear vision of his future.

So yes, the financial aspect plays a big part in who they are. Ray is rich rich and therefore he has no need to think about tomorrow. He is safe. He doesn’t need to think about job, or count expenses, or worry about future. Sand does.

Offtop but I really love the little details about their financial statuses. Sand never eats in university cause money. Ray can start a hotel business after one phone call. And my favorite is the cigarette thing. As a smoker I know NOTHING in the world makes me put on a whole cigarette. Not even a hot guy. Apocalypse can wait while I finish it. So yeah this shot was my moment of realization that Ray is very rich I’m not joking.

So what do I think gonna happen next? Ray will continue to push through, Sand will continue to give up (resisting in a process and tho giving quite mixed signals). Eventually they’ll come to a moment when Ray’s inability to think ahead will hurt Sand. And Sand will probably hurt Ray back. And the rest is history (I honestly don’t know what’ll happen this show is a mess).

And of course their relationship is not only about conflict, I find them very depressing but still very promising. There are a lot of great interactions going here but that’s probably a theme for another post.

[popblank]

Lempicka at the Longacre Theatre, Part 1:

This is a longwinded recap of my experience seeing the show and what I remember from it, with commentary (only a first part for now covering Act 1, because this post was getting way too long):

The original plan for my trip was to see The Who’s Tommy on Friday, Lempicka on Saturday (tickets pre-purchased), and then had a time slot open on Sunday where I was thinking about seeing another. But after the show I went back to my hotel room, stewed a bit, and ended up buying another ticket for the next day. Then on the way home I plotted how soon I could come back again, knowing the production wasn’t doing well in grosses and closing could be imminent. And then a few weeks later I took a red-eye across the country for the second time in a month to see the last three performances.  So it is fair to say I am Very Not Normal about this show and the post below reflects that.

It turned out that I first saw the Broadway production the weekend that Eden Espinosa was out sick, so at both of the initial shows I attended, Mariand Torres played Tamara. There were probably some fans who were disappointed that EE was out, but MT was very good in the role (especially vocally) and afterward I thought her take on Tamara was an interesting contrast to EE’s. In the Sunday 4/21 show, Ximone Rose played Rafaela, and I was also interested to see her version of Rafaela since she had played the role for the last two weeks in La Jolla but I had not seen her there. On that Sunday, at 1:30 the line to get into the theater for the 2 pm show had already turned the corner at Broadway, with no forward movement at all. Maybe 15 or 20 minutes later, I overheard someone who had walked from the direction of the box office saying that the two leads were out, which I assumed could only mean Eden Espinosa and Amber Iman. (It says something about the lopsidedness of the love triangle that this was the most reasonable assumption.)

Spoilers everywhere below the cut:

Walking in, the first thing the audience sees is an enormous backdrop of Autoportrait: Tamara in a Green Bugatti:

There is a bench and an easel on the stage, and to the right, a white arcing structure that was also present in La Jolla. Some of the musicians, including the conductor, were set up in the box seats on either side of the audience:

The overture starts with a nervous ticking beat that bursts into a propulsive electronic theme; the cast is revealed behind a transparent scrim, standing on the multilevel set and gazing steadily forward. This was one of my favorite moments in the show. It is not an overture that leisurely carries you through all of the themes and motifs, it’s just – here are the characters – here is the scenery – let’s GO. And then it’s only Tamara, sitting on the bench.

The show uses elderly Tamara de Lempicka reflecting on her life as the framing device (“Unseen”), though aside from the framing device the story is a mostly linear timeline.

From there, the story got off to a strange start for me. On the first viewing, it was very difficult to stop comparing and contrasting what I was seeing to what I remembered from the La Jolla production, and some of the material did not seem to pull me in as well as it had before, or just felt awkward. However, once Act 2 started that feeling pretty much disappeared, and on the second viewing I barely noticed. I wonder if something like this was what many of the critics experienced as well, except that they presumably only had time to see it once (as most of the audience would as well). So I think I understand some of the reviews, even if I disagree with them overall.

“Our Time” starts with a young Tamara and Tadeusz in St. Petersburg talking about their upcoming wedding. This song felt very, very expository, but it does a lot of work – it has to establish their personalities, situation, and relationship and then tears that world apart (or at least puts some serious cracks in it) by the end of the song. We see that Tamara is already so obsessed with painting that she is doing so on her wedding day, in her wedding dress (maybe a hint that she is comfortable with risk); we see that Tadeusz is very attached to his aristocratic inheritance and what he feels belongs to him (“this land, my family’s for centuries”) so that his support of the Tsar and later foray into Polish nationalism makes more sense. Another thing this song did reasonably effectively was to tell a story of Tamara and Tadeusz together as an actual couple who actually like each other, so that when Rafaela shows up later the first leg of the triangle has a little more solidity to it. Beth Leavel made her first appearance in this scene as Tamara’s mother and got entrance applause when she stepped in. When the song continues from the point of view of the Russian revolutionaries, the tone is much angrier and aggressively triumphant. After Tadeusz is hauled off to jail, Tamara bribes, cajoles, and finally offers her body to the revolutionary guards in order to free him. The last guard is played by George Abud, who will appear later as Marinetti.

Beth Leavel and George Abud both made brief appearances as seemingly minor characters from Tamara’s early life here, which I assume is intended to draw parallels to the roles their primary characters later play in Tamara’s life. Her mother (like the Baroness later) is the person who steadies her and keeps her moving forward on her path; the third guard is the person whose situational power pushes her into a terrible bargain and takes away her control. Marinetti ends up being her teacher and offers her a space she can control in terms of art, but also represents an artistic and ideological position that she is in an ongoing push-pull with throughout her life.

In some ways I preferred the La Jolla version of “Our Time” where the revolutionaries started out straightforwardly hopeful and over the course of the song moved to vengeful and threatening even as the language of the revolution remained the same. It reminded me of “At the End of the Day” from Les Misérables (incidentally, another show I can’t evaluate with objectivity) in depicting the setting and society, while the Broadway version was more narrative-driven and more focused on Tamara and Tadeusz, and the revolutionaries seemed more one-note and cartoonish. With the Broadway version I felt like I got a clearer and more concise understanding of the story at the expense of an interesting idea and a stronger emotional reaction to the song. Having this as the first plot-driving song also set a tone that didn’t quite work for me.

We follow the Lempickis on the night train to Paris surrounded by other refugees as they sing of “Starting Over” after their world has been upended – and only at the end do we get a little note of personal discord as Tadeusz wonders, “what did you do to get me out?” I really liked that bit – it is obvious foreshadowing (and continues in “Paris”) but is not signposted with neon lights, which is sometimes how “Our Time” felt.  I liked this song much better than the La Jolla version, where Tadeusz started in on the repeated questioning during the train ride and ended up seeming like an annoyance. Here he’s going on about some of his anger and resentment at his situation, but he and Tamara also have some moments of togetherness that made them seem like a couple who are very much in it together. There is the specific moment I mentioned in an earlier post, where they desperately cling to each other as they sing, “oh, and we’re free, a long dark night with you by my side”; hearing it in the theater, it was a brief & perfect expression of harmony while they are otherwise struggling with anxiety, fear, and uncertainty.

In “Paris” (“the ugliest beautiful city I’ve ever seen,” observes Tamara), once again a lot of things happen. In short, Tamara encounters Paris and sings about three things: work, women, and pastries, in that order. (In a way this could be an “I Want” song.) The work: the Lempickis manage to find an apartment but need to pay for rent, food, etc. Tadeusz is not particularly receptive to the idea of getting a job and his rumination takes a dark turn as he considers how Tamara could have gotten him out of prison when his influential father couldn’t; she deflects the question and in an ensuing argument he raises a hand to strike her but stops himself just short. Tamara goes out to look for work but her aristocratic life has not exactly given her marketable skills: “I’m… a very charming hostess!” Response: “We need cleaners, overnight shift.” Someone hands her a bucket. Bucket in hand, she sings about all of the women on the street showing their skin, which she rationalizes as being normal in a warmer climate (sure, Tamara). Though more seriously, she is seeing in them a freedom that she herself doesn’t have yet, so maybe that makes this more of an “I Need” song. On that note, she also sings about pastries, because she is surrounded by bakeries in Paris and has never been so hungry. Here I believe is where she sees a street artist painting at his easel. In a couple of the shows Eden Espinosa pulled a very funny “yikes” face before walking up to him and unthinkingly insulting his painting. So she decides to take up painting again after seeing that there is demand for it (even for an artist whose use of perspective is all wrong – I mean if that dude can sell a painting, why shouldn’t she?).

Then we get a funny little mid-song interlude with the madeleines. Tamara takes three madeleines out of a bakery box and arranges them on a plate in order to paint a still life. “Three madeleines,” she sings, then goes on and on about their lovely buttery goodness, leans in slowly to take a long, deep whiff of said buttery goodness – then abruptly crams one into her mouth with Cookie Monster levels of om nom nom. It is evidently very satisfying. Suddenly she looks at her now-disturbed still life, shrugs, and carefully rearranges the two remaining madeleines. “Two madeleines,” she sings, describing the elegant dusting of powdered sugar… then pauses to take a slow, deliberate lick of said sugar – then stuffs another one in her mouth. Next: “One madeleine –“ GULP and we are left with one very happy Tamara kicking her feet on the couch in delight, and an empty plate. But still needing something to paint, with a mouthful of madeleine she calls for Kizette (now a little more grown up) to pose for her. Part of the fun was that Eden Espinosa was clearly not actually eating all of the madeleines, though I don’t know if that was for performance reasons or for comic effect or both.

While showing her work on the street she meets the warmly supportive Baron and the skeptical Baroness, and he gives her a recommendation for Marinetti’s class at the Académie des Beaux-Arts. Later as she paints in the apartment, Tadeusz complains of the smell but Tamara dismisses it, saying they can’t afford a studio for her to paint in. Kizette agrees with her mother that oil paints smell good and Tamara seems pleased to have Kizette take her side, though when Kizette ropes her father into an impromptu dance Tamara looks on somewhat wistfully at his easy relationship with Kizette. When she finally sells a couple of her paintings (to the Baron), she starts to see a path and a future in this city where she now feels she belongs.

At this point there has been a whirlwind of setup so it is nice to settle down a bit for a late night at the art school. Marinetti drops in on Tamara and she gets a lesson on what a painting is (canvas, pigment, “Plan and Design,” among other things) and what it is not. The audience gets a glimpse at Tamara’s need for control. I really liked this scene a lot as a teaching scene, and as an introduction to both the artistic and musical themes that will get repeated later in the show. The way Tamara sings “…or a glittering sky…” as the music shifts from isolated notes punctuating Marinetti’s statements to flowing chords and strings, you really hear and feel that this new, big idea has finally clicked in her mind and she is opened up to a new way of thinking and a whole new reason to make art other than survival.

Rafaela makes her first appearance performing on the street (as indicated by a projected caption and a car prop) in “Don’t Bet Your Heart.” I didn’t care for the car; it’s a fitting symbol of the fast pace of technological progress and industry, but every car I’ve seen physically represented on a stage looks really static. I liked the song though – both Amber Iman and Ximone Rose did a great job, and of course Natalie Joy Johnson as Suzy Solidor is chaotic fun as she attempts to collect money from the audience in her uh, conquistador helmet (?). Here though was another example of neon-signposting: when Tamara shows up in the middle of the song, she runs in squarely in the center of the stage on the middle platform just behind the action, her jaw drops and suddenly everything is in slow motion for just a moment when she catches her first glimpse of Rafaela and asks, “Who - is - she?” It draws attention to an important point that the audience might have missed otherwise (because everyone is looking at Rafaela), but it still felt a little jarring that Tamara appears and takes so much focus, even if she quickly fades into the background again as she stares at Rafaela and gets jostled by the raucous crowd.

Everyone runs off at the sound of a police siren, but Tamara’s mind has been blown and she vows to herself “I Will Paint Her.” Mariand Torres killed on this song both nights, and on the second night her singing in the final lines gave me chills up and down my spine. Then in a later show I saw Eden Espinosa perform it and acted it with such depth of feeling that I thought, “wait… is this my favorite song in the show now?” even without the sheer vocal fireworks. (I feel extremely lucky to have been able to see both of them play Tamara.) In both cases it felt like there was a bit more emphasis on the whole “Tamara has totally fallen for Rafaela but doesn’t realize that’s what has happened” premise of the song, and the Broadway audience definitely got the humor where the La Jolla audience didn’t seem to; perhaps it was played straighter there, so to speak. There was a huge audience response to this song.

So now it is time for the first group art show that Tamara is a part of, and the verbal descriptions of her paintings are pretty funny, especially the one of Kizette (Tadeusz: “a demon child”; Marinetti: “strange little girl”; Suzy: “that little girl is PISSED!”). We get our first direct introduction to Suzy while she serves drinks to the art show guests and makes very, very broad double entendres. (If the Monocle show I briefly dropped in on at The Friki Tiki is an accurate indication, NJJ is playing a not-very-exaggerated version of herself.) Marinetti shows up and is his usual abrasive and cynical self, and when the Baroness questions him about the role of art in shaping society (for the worse) it starts a bit of an argument which is the lead-in to “Perfection.” Tadeusz wants to leave but when Marinetti says, “Beauty is an engine – beauty is power” you can see Tamara’s antennae going up and she waves Tadeusz off, saying she’ll be home soon.

Halfway through the song, Rafaela shows up and Tamara leaps to ask her to model, offering her a chance at immortality such that people in the future will ask,”Who - is - she?”

George Abud is such a fun presence in the show and “Perfection” is still (maybe?) my favorite song; it was as entertaining and alarming in person as it had been listening to the 2022 track on repeat for the past two years. However it was also here where the costumes and choreography were particularly confusing. Dance is not really my thing so there is probably a vocabulary of movement that I am not getting, but there were several dance moves that to me looked like weakly punching the air and making airplane arms while stepping to the beat, and I thought, “wait are they trying to represent machines? Like pistons and engines and actual airplanes?” I honestly do not understand what the intended effect was; I was not getting a story of speed or power or a glorious technological future from it but I am curious how others saw this. Costumes were a little distracting but I can talk myself into thinking that this is a world where the avant-garde is made visible and present everywhere and people just put on their costumes of daily life over it. (Though I do think it would have been easier to process the show overall if the ensemble costumes were a bit more period-representative.)

After all that, “Wake Up” sung by Tadeusz is a big contrast. Marinetti is at a point where he wants to wrest control of the future and turn it toward his purposes with an army of sleek backing dancers in corsets and leather bustiers, meanwhile Tadeusz is only just now dragging himself out of passivity and possibly depression to put on a very traditional three-piece suit and go apply for a job at a bank. I suppose one can’t expect that everyone’s going to be like Tamara, belting through adversity and charging forward on a path of artistic and emotional discovery. I do actually like this song because it tells me more about Tadeusz than I knew before and provides some character growth; the song helps give him an arc in the show where I don’t recall there was much of one before. In terms of pacing, it is breather after several high-energy songs in a row.

In an amusing montage, Tamara stalks the Dead Rat for days on end trying to find Rafaela, only for Suzy to break the news each time (in typically comic fashion) that Rafaela is not there. It turns out that the show’s conductor is also the piano player at the Dead Rat, because sometime before this scene, she moved out of the box seat and down to the stage. What I found neat was that the video monitor camera either went with her or switched views so that she could still conduct while on stage.

Tamara gives up pestering Suzy for a bit to go paint, with Kizette modeling. In “Mama Look at Me,” Kizette quietly begs her mother to actually see her, but as usual Tamara is absorbed in her work and keeps viewing her daughter in terms of the parts of the image she is creating. Giving up after one last “Mama…”, Kizette eventually changes tack and asks why Tamara has told people Kizette was born in Warsaw (rather than Petrograd). Tamara explains the microaggression toward Jews that drove her answer (a modern variant might be “where are you really from?”) and provides a capsule history of the independent Polish state complete with morphing background projections, which I found clunkily expository the first time I saw it but appreciated more in subsequent viewings since I am sadly not nerdy enough about European history.  It also sets up some of the background of Tadeusz claiming his Polish identity, which will lead to conflict later. Tamara further explains her tactic of deflection where she deliberately makes people focus on the thing she wants them to see. (Come to think of it, the show itself has done this a few times.)

There is a fun scene transition where Rafaela shows up and Suzy calls out “she’s here!” from across the stage to Tamara while she’s still in the studio with Kizette, and Tamara being Tamara she promptly ditches her adoring, needy daughter to go meet Rafaela at the Dead Rat.

Tamara and Rafaela drink and converse and find common ground and gradually the conversation turns to more personal topics, as Tamara alludes to the story of the third guard. Seeing some kinship in Tamara’s vulnerability, Rafaela offers Tamara opium to help her relax, and asks the musicians for “Bracelet, in A.” As Rafaela sings “The Most Beautiful Bracelet” (basically directly to Tamara, even as she’s feeling up the other patrons of the bar), Tamara is staring back at her with naked longing.

(Note: I did miss the song “Stillness” from previous productions and the buildup it provided for the relationship between Tamara and Rafaela, but understand why it would be removed since it did kind of kill momentum. This version works even with the seduction happening sooner.)

After the song, Tamara is tongue-tied and loopy. In this state of confusion she again falls back on the language of art to express her attraction by professing a fascination with Rafaela’s lipstick color, which leads to a kiss, which leads to Tamara bringing Rafaela back to her studio where, to the sound of a sweeping romantic instrumental, they start removing their clothing (Tamara appears to be briefly awestruck when Rafaela is standing before her in only a slip) and climb into the bed with Tamara sitting atop Rafaela.

I must talk about this lighting effect now (but bear in mind I know exactly nothing about stage lighting). For most of the love scene it is dimly lit, evoking nighttime with some sort of limited external light such as street lights, or perhaps a full moon through a window. Onstage there is a row of smallish circular bluish-white lights running the length of the top of the stage which start out pointing downward toward the stage. As Tamara moves her body against Rafaela and slowly extends her arm upward in an expression of passion, the row of lights rotates upward to point toward the audience. As they rotate it appears they are getting brighter (or maybe it is just due to the lights shining more directly at the audience) and the light becomes blinding as Tamara reaches (a very strongly implied) orgasm. At the same time, the lighting below dims, the music diminishes, and Tamara, Rafaela, and everything on stage fade from visibility into a nearly opaque wall of cloudy blue. It was very cool to look at and I don’t think I am doing it justice with my description.

Later I was thinking about how that might work; when the audience comes in at the beginning of the show, I did notice this fog-effect going on at the top of the stage:

So I wonder if they can maybe crank that fog machine (or whatever) up and let the vapor diffuse throughout the stage area for this scene, then when the time comes they can hit the area with lights such the light scatters in a particular spectrum, or maybe they can just use colored filters, I don’t know. But then how do you ensure that the wall of haze is uniform and stays where it needs to be? Anyway, maybe a lighting designer has explained it somewhere on the internet.

It’s still nighttime, and Tamara wakes and exits the room to gather her thoughts, when unexpectedly a slightly drunk, apologetic Tadeusz shows up to give her flowers. Wracked with guilt over how she has betrayed their relationship, Tamara goes back into her studio intending to end the liaison right then. But when she sees the sleeping Rafaela illuminated by a gentle light, she forgets everything else as she launches into “Woman Is.” And who can blame her? There is a very cool visual sequence during the song when Tamara sings “I want to feel your soft lips, your sharp teeth” etc. and piece by piece the lighted edges of the set behind her start to come alive (partly visible in this video from Production Stage Manager Cody Renard Richard).

Finally the song ends, the curtain falls and when the lights go up we see the imposing image of “La Belle Rafaela” throughout intermission.

(Part 2 coming soon-ish)

[hadesknockedupintheunderworld]

What if I was insane again about the first thing Alpha Grim Sonic hearing when Nine creates him is his purpose—that he is Nine's friend?

Friendship as a concept in Prime is handled interestingly among its main characters. As Sonic (who thinks he knows a lot about friendship) comes to deepen his understanding of what it means to have a home/be home, I think it's safe to say his definition of friendship develops along with it. Compare this to Nine, who's learned everything he knows about "friendship" and personal relationships in general through his relationship with Sonic (at least, after his childhood of bullying).

So of course I think about Nine, who never wants to be hurt again, yet can no longer bear feeling alone (not after feeling that sense of companionship and belonging with someone else), which results in him creating a warped version of friendship for himself (one where he is surrounded by people, but people who only do whatever he wants, who have no opinions and thoughts of their own, who can't backstab him). And so I think about Alpha Grim Sonic, who is the very first robot Nine creates under this idea of frienship and companionship.

Nine is his master, and Alpha Grim Sonic is his protector, his bodyguard, his weapon

But he's also his friend.

Alpha Grim Sonic doesn’t talk back (can't even if he wanted to), but his purpose has always been clear to him: be Nine's friend. That's what he was created to be.

So I imagine Alpha Grim Sonic performing his purpose to the T at first under Nine's framework. He's Nine's friend, so he does whatever Nine commands, he never talks back or challenges authority, he protects Nine at all cost. And then, perhaps unbeknownst to Nine, he begins to shift ever so gradually. Sure, he's never insubordinate, he never offers up opinions, he still can't speak, but the lines of devotion begin to blur.

Is it in his code? Is out of a real sense of feeling?

Alpha Grim Sonic does not understand friendship, no matter whether it believes it does or not. But it's ironic to me if, despite being created under Nine's warped idea of it, the robot slowly grows their own soul, witnesses other displays of frienship and care, and drifts outside the bounds of that idea (a carefully crafted painting begins to leak out of its frame, expanding the masterpiece). They protect Nine, they do only what he commands, and yet they hate to see Nine in pain, they wish to bring Nine comfort (and so it feels good to him when Nine commands him to do such things that might bring his master comfort).

Does this make any sense? To believe that friendship means to hold one person on a pedestal, to protect them, to only listen to them, to never talk back, to never have opinions, and yet, despite believing what your creator tells you of friendship with them (your very purpose in this existence), to slowly fall further into those feelings that true care and love for another person brings, to wish to comfort someone the way one might describe a true friend would, despite not realizing any of this.

[sephirthoughts]

K for the ship ask game, please: What character has your favorite development arc/the best development arc?

Thank you for the ask, anon! 🖤

In any video game, Majima Goro, hands down. Best character development ever. I have ugly-cried many times over Yakuza Zero. I love Kiryu but his arc is nothing compared to Majima's. I'm a sucker for beaten dog turns into a big bad wolf tropes. He goes from eager kid, to beaten dog, to disillusioned young man, to the scariest motherfucker on the planet, all through personal pain and sacrifice. He seems to have lost his mind later, but it becomes apparent through what he does rather than what he says, that despite his acting like a violent psychopath for funsies (and because that's his carefully cultivated public image), he is very clear minded, always loyal, never fails his promises, and retains his strong sense of honor and integrity.

If we're talking about FF7 specifically, I really like Tseng's arc. From joining the Turks as this gung-ho teenager who wanted to save the soldiers instead of the Shinra weaponry, then slowly getting hardened and sharpened by the brutal reality of his world, and yet retaining his personal sense of integrity and loyalty (seeing a theme here?), and having a very clear cut moral bottom line.

Not saying it's a benevolent one, just that it's a clear one. He will absolutely drop the Sector 7 plate potentially killing thousands, but he won't drop it on Aerith. Later, when Reno and Rude are dealing with the guilt over their actions, he tries to console them by giving them ways to excuse themselves (even though they're not having any of it).

The most outstanding example of his personal integrity is when Zack asks him to take care of Aerith and insists Tseng is the only one he can trust. Tseng does that deeply ironic laugh, which thick-skulled Zack doesn't understand, but to the viewer, is very intelligible. He laughs because Zack is unknowingly asking him to not only give up the girl he loves to Zack, but also to keep protecting her for when Zack returns.

Please note that I do NOT personally ship them, but I don't care if it's never made explicit, I am not six years old and subtext is a valid means of canonical storytelling. Tseng is very clearly in love with Aerith too. Zack doesn't know that, and naively leaves the girl he loves in the care of a man who also loves her. EXCEPT! it's not naive because that man is Tseng. Zack is his friend. He promised he'd take care of her for Zack, and he does. His integrity is his bottom line.

And he doesn't half-ass it or try to slide into her DMs in the proverbial sense. He keeps every one of those letters and genuinely intends to give them to Zack. He tries earnestly to find and save him, knowing Aerith loves Zack and not him, because he is loyal to his friend. Also BECAUSE he loves Aerith and she loves Zack. He loves her MORE than he wants to be with her, and getting Zack home safely to her is what will make her happy, even if it means that happiness is with another man.

And, perhaps most tellingly, he keeps his feelings to himself and never ever makes them HER PROBLEM. He doesn't seem to think Aerith will ever care for him, or that it would ever be possible for them to be together even if she did, but he constantly makes decisions to benefit her anyway, within the scope his loyalty to the Turks and Rufus allows. He doesn't technically break the rules but he bends them to the very extreme in her favor. He supports her relationship with the man she loves, and doesn't ask her to choose, or even to consider him, even a little bit. Which is…hoo boy. Basically qualifies him for sainthood, despite the laissez faire attitude toward mass murder.

Before anyone argues about how he took her to Shinra and gave her to Hojo, yes he did. He does a lot of bad-guy things. He's not a good-guy. But he operates within the bad-guy system in a very morally sound way. He did NOT put Aerith into danger by taking her to Shinra. He knew they had to keep her safe and unharmed in order for their plans to work, so he was assured of her safety there for the time being. FAR FAR safer than she'd have been in literally any other part of Midgar during that chaos. Then he went and made SURE her friends with a history of anti-Shinra terrorism and winning unwinnable fights know EXACTLY where to find her. When they come to do just that, there are no Turks around trying to stop them. Wonder why...

Oh shit this got so long!!! 😅 I could go on about Tseng all day but I'll end it here for the sake of everyone's sanity. But I absolutely WILL talk about him any time anyone wants to inbox me about it!